Wikiquote:Vandalism in progress/Archive/12

New report 2022-07-1, 05:15


@User:Aphaia @User:BD2412 @User:DannyS712 @User:Ferien @User:GreenMeansGo @User:Illegitimate Barrister @User:Jusjih @User:Kalki @User:Koavf @User:Mdd @User:Miszatomic @User:Ningauble @User:Pmlineditor @User:UDScott @User:Ilovemydoodle GRP sock. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus) (talk / e-mail) 05:15, 1 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ --Ferien (talk) 05:48, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I know. Could you also click the 'confirm' button on his user page? – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus) (talk / e-mail) 05:50, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * , no, as I have said before, it is not helpful to tag these socks and I do not think it is a helpful use of my time to confirm. --Ferien (talk) 14:50, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-1, 18:25


Spam. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus) (talk / e-mail) 18:28, 1 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:52, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-1, 18:28


Edit warring. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus) (talk / e-mail) 19:04, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-2, 04:14


Spam/promotion. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus) (talk / e-mail) 04:53, 2 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ globally —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:52, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-3, 05:19


Vandalism. Hasn't this IP been reported like a billion times already? Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 05:34, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-5, 05:10


Sockpuppet, likely open proxy or VPN. p Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 05:21, 5 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:17, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I think you forgot to block. – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 13:51, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ wow. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:07, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-7, 21:53


Sockpuppet, likely VPN or open proxy. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 21:53, 7 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:42, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-7, 21:54


Sockpuppet, likely VPN or open proxy. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 21:54, 7 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:42, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you! – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 03:43, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-7, 21:55


Sockpuppet, likely VPN or open proxy. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 21:55, 7 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:43, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-8, 02:29


Vandalism, sockpuppet of. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 03:00, 8 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:43, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-8, 03:00


Sockpuppeteering. Vandalism. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 03:00, 8 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:43, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-8, 05:10


Sockpuppet of. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 05:10, 8 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:32, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-8, 12:18


Sockpuppet, likely VPN or open proxy. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 12:19, 8 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ❌, just one dumb edit. Let me know if there are more. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:47, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-8, 20:03


GRP sock. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 20:03, 8 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ globally. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:47, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-10, 02:15


GRP sock. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 02:15, 10 July 2022 (UTC)


 * done}}{ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:22, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-10, 02:15


GRP sock. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 02:23, 10 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:23, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-10, 03:33


Promotional username. Vandalism. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 03:36, 10 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:23, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Per username policy shouldn't you block indefinitely but with account creation allowed? – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 06:27, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It seems generic to me. Is there an actual publication called Fashion Magazine NYC? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:31, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes. – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 23:00, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-10, 06:27


GRP sock. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 07:20, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-10, 14:00


UAA/vio. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 14:07, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-10, 19:12


Continued vandalism after being warned several times. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 19:15, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-11, 22:46


Vandalism. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 22:54, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-12, 10:19


Spam, promotion. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 11:16, 12 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:38, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-14, 02:43


Long-term cross-wiki subtle vandalism. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 02:44, 14 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅, some obviously vandalism. Thanks. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:54, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-14, 12:05


Sockpuppet of. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 12:06, 14 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:57, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-15, 16:09


Sockpuppet. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 16:10, 15 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:24, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-15, 19:20


Please softblock the account, as it was supposedly created by accident. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 19:21, 15 July 2022 (UTC)


 * , there is no need to block the account. --Ferien (talk) 19:35, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I said softblock, so it isn't used for accidental sockpuppetry – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 19:44, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * , that should only be done if requested. Unless it is specifically asked by the user, this is --Ferien (talk) 19:47, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-15, 19:47


GRP sock. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 19:58, 15 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:01, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-17, 22:10


Sockpuppet of (based on username, this report was before any edits were made). Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 22:11, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-17, 22:11


Sockpuppet. Edit: confirmed Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 22:43, 17 July 2022 (UTC)


 * per confirmation above --Ferien (talk) 09:30, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-18, 10:12


Promotion. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 11:00, 18 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ Warning seems sufficient. If it persists, let us know. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:23, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-20, 13:15


Spam, promotion. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 13:15, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ ~ UDScott (talk) 13:24, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-20, 18:23


WP:HOUNDING, WP:PA, WP:CIVILITY, WP:BATTLE, clearly not here to build a compendium of quotations, long-term vandalism: [1]. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 18:40, 20 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ❌ See your talk. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:38, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Spambot
Spam Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 08:40, 29 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:21, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-07-31, 12:44


Spammer/Spambot. 192.76.8.85 12:45, 31 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:38, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-08-1, 19:25


Cross-wiki harassment (see enwiki block log) ToBeFree (talk) 19:26, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Now locked; please do also place a local block, though. It may seem pointless first, but having a local block log to point to will help in case the user needs to be re-reported. ToBeFree (talk) 19:44, 1 August 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅  G M G  talk  19:56, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-09-8, 05:55


Sock of. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 05:55, 8 September 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:02, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Could you block the full range? (100.15.44.189/24) Thanks. – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 06:12, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:19, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-09-8, 05:55


Sock of. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 05:57, 8 September 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:01, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-09-8, 06:12


Lock evasion of. Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 06:15, 8 September 2022 (UTC)


 * ❌ Already blocked. If this needs a global lock, go to m:. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:19, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Already did, but Stewards are slow lately, so I would recommend having an indef in the meantime.


 * Update: stewards locked the account. – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 06:22, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-09-22, 07:00


Same as this report; that IP range is back after the three-month block. Graham87 (talk) 07:06, 22 September 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ Blocked for 6 months. --Ferien (talk) 07:14, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-8, 16:09


Persistent adding of false or unnecessary info to Ed, Edd n Eddy (season 1). I suspect this is the same user as who made identical disruptive edits on the same pageSpiritoftheeast1993 (talk) 16:19, 8 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:08, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-8, 16:36


Repeated vandalism of Ed, Edd n Eddy (season 2), Dexter's Laboratory, and SpongeBob SquarePants/Season 3 Spiritoftheeast1993 (talk) 16:40, 8 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:08, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-9, 02:02


I suspect this may be the same user as and.

All of them keep reverting other users' edits for no apparent reason, including my edits, at The Adventures of Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius/Season 1.

Spiritoftheeast1993 (talk) 02:07, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-13, 01:51


Keeps spamming pages with multiple disruptive edits

Spiritoftheeast1993 (talk) 01:57, 13 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Looking at some edits, I see some basically arbitrary changes in formatting (e.g. https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Harry_Potter_and_the_Goblet_of_Fire_%28film%29&type=revision&diff=3176636&oldid=3150052), but that doesn't constitute vandalism. Do you have instances of outright vandalism? If so, please provide diffs. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:05, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @User:koavf No, I suppose he's just one of those amateur editors Spiritoftheeast1993 (talk) 02:17, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-13, 02:33


This is the worst case of vandalism I've ever seen. For 3 months, a dozen IP users were vandalizing The Rescuers Down Under! I was swamped reverting all of them. I'm going to submit a request for page protection soon.

Spiritoftheeast1993 (talk) 03:21, 13 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅. Stale IPs not blocked, article protected. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:15, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-13, 20:54


Persistent vandalism. Tropicalkitty (talk) 20:54, 13 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ global block —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:05, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-15, 03:40


87.33.81.132 has vandalized Vladimir Putin, as evidenced in and. I have reverted the IP user's edit. DutchOff (talk) 03:42, 15 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:52, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-15, 20:50


This person persistently adds anti-Semitic vandalism to the "Talmud" page. For context, the Talmud is a very important holy book in Judaism and explains the Jewish perspective of the Bible (or as it's called in Judaism, the "Tanakh").

The vast majority of this IP's edits are to that page. This vandalism started on September 10 and the IP had made edits to the page almost everyday since then, with a gap between September 22 and September 26 when no edits were made. This means that at the time of this report on 15 August, the IP has been vandalizing the page several times a day, most days, for more than a month, 42 days in total. The amount of edits to the page by the IP literally reach into the thousands and the vast majority of the edits during this time were made by this one user. In addition, there was much more editing activity to the page during the IP's time vandalizing the page then at any other time before.

The nature of the vandalism itself was quite unusual in that it's vandalism disguised as constructive edits. The IP greatly expanded the page and added several quotes from the Talmud but this seems to be a faulty translation of the work as these quotes are cherry-picked to give a false impression of the Talmud (and by extension, Judaism and the Jewish people) and purport that it promotes lying to gentiles (non-Jews), encourages the theft of gentile's money claiming it's a good thing, declares gentiles closer then animals than humans, calls for the death of gentiles who read the Bible, proclaiming Jesus of Nazareth a magician who worshiped a brick and whose religion led Jews astray (it seems that most of the mentions of a person called "Jesus" in the Talmud does not refers to Jesus of Nazareth, founder of Christianity, though the edits make off that they do), and most disturbingly of all, giving a libelous claim that some of the passages promote child abuse.

The IP has also added images and some of them are used in a derogatory manner. For example, a quote from the chapter "Avodah Zarah" about moneylending is accompanied by an image of Shylock, the Jewish moneylender from the Shakespeare play "The Merchant of Venice" where that character was the villain. A quote from "Kiddushin" is met with an drawing of a blue ribbon with "Child abuse awareness" printed on it. Meanwhile, a quote from "Ketubot" has beside it, an image of the "Three Monkeys", three statues of monkeys (associated with "say no evil, see no evil, hear no evil", a famous non-Jewish slogan which is not featured in the image) that from left to right has a monkey covering his mouth ("say no evil"), another covering his eyes ("see no evil") and the final one covering his ears ("hear no evil"). In that last quote purporting to promote child abuse, the image falsely implies that a Jewish person will ignore child abuse if done by another Jewish person.

Another part of the page that the IP has expanded is the "Quotes about the Talmud​" section which as implied, features quotes about the Talmud​ found in other works. The vast majority of these quotes are used in much the same way the quotes from the Talmud are. Of the Jewish figures quoted on the page, only one, Maimonides, is shown is a somewhat positive light, denouncing child abuse (which the IP falsely claims is promoted by the Talmud). The IP counters this beforehand by claiming that "anti-gentile sentiments are quite common in his works". Those quotes by other Jewish people in that part of the page tend to paint them more negatively than Maimonides. One quote comes from an article titled "'We Curse Christianity Three Times a Day': Can Jews and Christians Truly Reconcile?" which mightn't have the best optics, especially because it comes from Haaretz, an Israeli newspaper. Most surprisingly, one quote of derived from "RationalWiki", a website that debunks pseudoscience though because it's run by atheists, RationalWiki's definition of "pseudoscience" includes not only stuff such as chemtrails and crackpot cancer cures but also all religions. What's more interesting is that RationalWiki is a wiki meaning that just as with Wikipedia and Wikiquote, people can edit the page and add or remove stuff there. There's one question I would like to ask about Wikquote, are you really meant to add quotes from other wikis? Really? Is that wiki even relevant in that context?

After noting these several observances, it's very clear that the IP is editing the page for anti-Semitic purposes. While some other users and IPs tried to either remove the anti-Semitism or make actually constructive edits with a warning about the vandal in the description, these actions were in vain and the vandalism continued. If something like this happened on Wikipedia, it would be over in 42 minutes or even 42 seconds, not 42 days. I know that Wikiquote doesn't get as much views as Wikipedia but come on now, this is embarrassing. What's more is that the page linked to the Wikipedia page about the "Talmud" which was how I found it in the first place meaning that people coming from Wikipedia can see it. I recommend a close look of the page, sorting out all the vandalism from the constructive edits to remove the vandalism. You really do need to check it now. I do honestly wonder why it's taken so long but I'm pretty sure this will solve it.

Before I go, I have some final words. The first is for the IP just in case he tries to make false accusations against me so I'd like to make clear that I am an gentile. The next is to once again note that this vandalism went on for longer than it needed to. And finally an apology for the length of this message which I felt was necessary not only to prove my point but also show in detail that the edits are vandalism.

To the mods or admins who check out the vandalism, thanks in advance. 109.76.150.181 20:50, 15 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I don't know that I can digest all of this, but at the very least the essay portion is not appropriate for Wikiquote for its length. Can you give me a diff that shows something anti-Semitic? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:52, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, here's one, https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&diff=next&oldid=3169857. To be honest, with the list of things observed and the IP address to prove it, I though that it was self evident that it was anti-Semitic vandalism. Remember, this was several thousand edits and not just one. You really do need to sort this out but I'm sure you can do it. Thanks again.--109.76.150.181 23:07, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't see any way to sort out this article other than deleting it. Anti-Semitic content is obviously vile and cannot be posted here, but as you pointed out, teasing out what is bigoted may be a difficult task. Since this article basically only has contributions from this IP, I'm leaning to just delete, but I want some more opinions. should I just delete this page and block the user? This is a lot to wade thru. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:27, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Actually, rather than deleting the page, might I suggest reverting back to the last version before this IP user began editing (it appears this would be on September 4, 2022). Any attempt to remove the vandalism is likely to include some valid quotes, but this would be the cleanest approach I believe. And then perhaps others can then build the page into more (without the antisemitism). ~ UDScott (talk) 00:26, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I would at least keep both these edits https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&type=revision&diff=3169849&oldid=3169847 https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&type=revision&diff=3172011&oldid=3171991 use as they seem to be added in good faith and not vandalism. Indeed, both use different IP addresses from the vandal and even try to warn people about the anti-Semitism. The user "Prwade" tried to remove some of the anti-Semitic quotes twice on 11 September early into the vandalism https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&oldid=3163326 https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&oldid=3163334. Unfortunately, Prwade's edits were both reverted by the vandal https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&oldid=3163330 https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&oldid=3163335. The only helpful thing the vandal did is give the first good IP the source for his quote https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&type=revision&diff=3169885&oldid=3169871 and user PedroAcero76 reverted the second good IP's edit https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&type=revision&diff=3172050&oldid=3172011, maybe the PedroAcero76 thought that the good IP was colluding with the vandal? Besides that, I also recommend that all the vandal's edits on other pages also be checked for anti-Semitism, especially those edits done on pages about Jewish people such as Sarah Silverman and Ben Shapiro. Also get the vandal to come over here to try and explain him/herself before you ban the vandal. Thanks for reading. --109.76.150.181 00:47, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, everyone. I feel I should chime in with some comments of my own, before you make whatever decision you decide to make.

First, I must stress that I have always edited the Talmud page in good faith. I have added as many sources as possible, precisely to show and prove that my edits are sincere and factual. I have added sources and references where I could, and otherwise, I have added links to Wikipedia, Wiktionary and Wikiquote to make it easier to verify any claims made. Most of my edits are of this kind; that is, to a large extent, why there are so many of them. Also, I have collaborated with other users, adding sources to their contributions and doing what I could to encourage contributions from others. Mostly, however, I have edited the page on my own.

I also wrote a short essay commenting upon the selection of quotes. This was since deleted. But I wrote it in good faith, and I want to remark upon why I wrote it. I originally didn't intend for it to be so long-winded, but there are certain basic points that ought to be established early on. One important point to make, for example, is that the Talmud is so large that few people have read it in its entirety. Any selection of quotes cannot therefore be representative of the whole work, or of any particular interpretation or application of the Talmud. This and other points, it seems should me, needed to be made, but eventually the text grew into an essay and I recognized that it ought to be shortened. I then added a comment noting that the essay could use some shortening.

In any case, some commentary seems necessary, as Talmudic quotes can be quite confounding or cryptic on their own. Take the subject of Jesus in the Talmud. I have quoted multiple passages that are believed to refer to Jesus, citing the scholarly work Jesus in the Talmud by Peter Schäfer on several occasions. I have linked to a talk named "Is Jesus in the Talmud?" by Rabbi Michael Skobac, where he reads from the passages in question and comments upon them. I have referenced the article "An Introduction to the Names Yehoshua/Joshua, Yeshua, Jesus and Yeshu" by Kai Kjær-Hansen, who did a doctoral dissertation on the names of Jesus. I have also added numerous links to relevant Wikipedia and Wiktionary pages. Although these are not as strong as the scholarly references, I think they go to show that the subject matter is real, and they provide further reading for the interested reader.

Then there is the subject of child marriage. Yes, I have unearthed this troublesome subject on purpose, because I think it needs to be said. The Talmud does say what one wishes it didn't. It isn't just a single passage taken out of context; it is a whole cluster of passages that, when taken together, show that such practices were indeed permitted, and practiced. I have therefore quoted widely on this subject, and I have also quoted the esteemed scholar Maimonides to show what he thought of all this. Of course, Maimonides discourages such practices, but the reason he discourages them is that they were indeed permitted.

The same goes for other difficult passages. Not everything that is said about gentiles in the Talmud makes for pleasant reading, but it is what it is. I have emphasized some passages with what I think are relevant images from Wikimedia Commons, although these can of course be improved. I added an image of Shylock, for example, because I felt it was fitting illustration of a troubling passage about moneylending. Adding images is a way to emphasize certain passages, and I feel like these passages should be emphasized. Of course, one may emphasize positive passages as well, and this I have also done, as in the case of the seven Noahide laws.

I have provided a link to Sefaria.org for every Talmudic quote I have added, so that anyone could verify for themselves that the quotes are genuine and are not made up or mistranslated. There are no false translations that I am aware of. I have also encouraged, in the preface, that everyone source their quotes in this way. When they have not, I have added sources for them.

I have consistently upheld this standard because, as far as I can tell, it is the only way to ensure that the quotes are authentic, and to prevent editing wars. If you inspect the early history of the page, you will often see quotes added without a source, and then those quotes are later deleted by someone else under the pretext of "antisemitism". The thing is, in many cases, the quotes are genuine. The Talmud really does say that. It is not antisemitism if it is the truth, and we all have a right to know the facts of the matter, whether we are Jew or gentile, believer or nonbeliever. Only on that basis can we make informed choices and figure out our own beliefs.

We should apply the same standard to Maimonides and the beliefs he held, not all of which have aged well into the modern age. This edit is being cited as proof of antisemitism, but it is not antisemitism; it is truth. Read the original passage and see for yourself. There are a lot of passages like this, and they are all over the place.

Then there are the other quotes about the Talmud. In the article "'We Curse Christianity Three Times a Day': Can Jews and Christians Truly Reconcile?", written by Israel Jacob Yuval for Haaretz, an interesting point is made about the Talmud: that it doesn't reference non-Jewish works at all, except for a single quote from the New Testament. I felt that this fact was so astonishing that it warranted both inclusion and emphasis. I have not been concerned with the "optics" of the article's title, whatever they may be. I quoted it for its quoteworthiness and relevance, and those have been my guiding concerns.

The same holds true of the RationalWiki quote, which, whatever you may think of it, was added to provide more nuance: the article makes the point of comparing old Talmudic passages to old and outdated laws, and this is an insightful lens to view the Talmud through. Whether the article is quoteworthy or not, I felt that it made a good point. Perhaps the point can be incorporated into a comment or a preface, which, indeed, is what I have been trying to do.

Finally, there is the charge of antisemitism, which I must be permitted to address. I feel that this charge is wholly baseless. I do not consider myself an antisemite in the slightest, and I would certainly not be studying Jewish heritage to the extent that I have if I were. I can only state my own story in plain terms. What began as a love affair with the Hebrew alphabet and the beauty of the letters, eventually developed into something more. All can say is that the Hebrew alphabet remains beautiful to me, and much that is written in Hebrew letters is beautiful, but I cannot say that everything that is written in Hebrew letters is beautiful. There is a Jewish saying whose exact wording I cannot recall right now, but it makes the point that perhaps the only thing that is more troublesome than an antisemite is a philosemite, i.e., a well-meaning gentile who takes too deep an interest in the Jewish heritage. I feel it applies here.

On a similar note, I wholly reject the charge of vandalism. I am not a vandal, and I think it is a form of verbal abuse and a smear tactic to speak of me as if I am. "Vandalism disguised as constructive edits"? How do I even respond to that?

In the end, I can only leave to Wikiquote's administrators what to make of all this. Let the record state that I contributed in good faith, that I did my best to be factual, that I added as many sources and references as I could, and that I stand by the claims made. That is all I can do. 81.167.4.189 02:05, 16 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I feel this is not a simple vandalism issue and with two lengthy messages on both sides, I don't feel this kind of discussion is in scope of the Vandalism in progress noticeboard that is usually used for quick uncontroversial block requests. Reading through some of the comments that have been made and noting the length of the comments that have been made, this is likely more of a content dispute, so I'm going to say as of right now. Please discuss the edits that have been made with each other, getting a third opinion from the Village pump if necessary. --Ferien (talk) 19:51, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ferien, If the text of this discussion is to be moved, can it be done without losing the extensive contribution history, and leaving a link here for those who would like to followup? Ottawahitech (talk) 16:59, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
 * , I'm not planning to move the text of this discussion and I would not support anyone else doing so. --Ferien (talk) 18:33, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ferien, why do you feel moving this discussion to another WQ page is a bad idea? Ottawahitech (talk) 17:13, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * , as I said, this seems to be more of a content dispute and I don't think those should be discussed on Project discussion pages unless discussion on User talk: has failed, especially considering the length of both the main comments here. --Ferien (talk) 17:46, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ferien. Since you seem to object to moving this discussion to WQ-space then how about Talk:Talmud? Ottawahitech (talk) 13:57, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * , that seems ok to me. I don't mind all that much, I just don't think it should be here and it's a really large discussion for all the text in it to be moved to another page. --Ferien (talk) 15:59, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ferien, This is exactly why I believe this discussion should be moved (with its contribution history). A lot of effort was made by the previous contributors to make this a thoughtful discussion. IMIO this type of discussion should be encouraged here, not just deleted/archived(?) away.
 * So, can you move it? Ottawahitech (talk) 16:15, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, everyone. Here follows a recounting of some recent events pertaining to the Talmud page.

On 18 October 2022, 17:38, at the Village pump page, the user Rich Farmbrough suggested to enlist the user Debresser (Wikipedia profile) to help review the Talmud page. Rich Farmbrough also proposed to split the page into various divisions, with only the most famous quotes being kept on the main page.

On 18 October 2022, 20:05, Debresser made an edit to the Talmud page. The edit removed the sentence "Modern-day Rabbinic Judaism thus has its historical roots in Pharisaic Judaism." The edit summary reads: "Maybe, but this is not the Modern Judaism page, rather the Talmud page. Also, trying to make a point."

On 18 October 2022 20:14, Debresser made an edit to the Talmud page. The edit removed Sanhedrin 59a:2, Sanhedrin 59a:3, Sanhedrin 57a:16, Sanhedrin 57a:17, Sanhedrin 57a:22, Sanhedrin 82a:4, Sanhedrin 64a:17, Sanhedrin 54b:20–21 and Sanhedrin 55b:4. The edit summary reads: "Sanhedrin: None of these are notable quotes, and Wikiquote is not Wikibooks."

On 18 October 2022 20:17, Debresser made an edit to the Talmud page. The edit removed Kiddushin 10a:10, Niddah 44b:9, Ketubot 11b:5, Ketubot 11b:6, Yevamot 57b:3, Yevamot 12b:3–4, Yevamot 98a:3, Avodah Zara 37a:1, Avodah Zarah 36b:2, Avodah Zarah 2a:1, Avodah Zarah 26a:16, Avodah Zarah 26b:6, Avodah Zarah 26b:7, Bava Kamma 113b:8, Bava Kamma 113b:10, Bava Kamma 113b:11, Bava Kamma 113b:11, Bava Kamma 113b:12 and Bava Kamma 113a:21. The edit summary reads: "Quotes: Same. Also, it seems somebody simply wrote here everything that relates to gentiles. And somebody wrote here everything that relates to intercourse with minors."

On 18 October 2022 20:19, Debresser made an edit to the Talmud page. The edit removed Gittin 57a:3–4, Sotah 47a:6, Sotah 47a:13, Sotah 47a:14, Sanhedrin 43a:20, Sanhedrin 43a:21 and Sanhedrin 103a:14. The edit summary reads: "Quotes: Same. And somebody decided to bring here everything related to Jesus."

On 18 October 2022 20:20, Debresser made an edit to the Talmud page. The edit removed Bava Metzia 114b:2 and Keritot 6b:20. The edit summary reads: "Bava Metzia: As before."

On 18 October 2022 20:20, Debresser made an edit to the Talmud page. The edit removed Eruvin 43b:6. The edit summary reads: "Eruvin: Same."

On 18 October 2022 20:21, Debresser made an edit to the Talmud page. The edit removed Mishneh Torah, Sefer Nashim, Ishut 3:11, Mishneh Torah, Sefer Nashim, Ishut 3:19 and Mishneh Torah, Sefer Kedushah, Issurei Biah 12:9–10. The edit summary reads: "Mishneh Torah: As above."

On 18 October 2022 20:22, Debresser made an edit to the Talmud page. The edit removed a parenthesis stating that the Pirkei Avot is a compilation of Pharisaic wisdom. The edit summary reads: "See also: Not needed here, and - again - argumentative."

On 18 October 2022, 20:24, Debresser made an edit to the Talmud page. The edit removed a quote from the talk "Is Jesus in the Talmud?" by Rabbi Michael Skobac, a quote from the article "'We Curse Christianity Three Times a Day': Can Jews and Christians Truly Reconcile?" by Israel Jacob Yuval, a quote from the book 21 Lessons for the 21st Century by Yuval Noah Harari, a quote from the book You Gentiles by Maurice Samuel, and a quote from the interview "When Israel Is Mighty" with Yossi Gurvitz. The edit summary reads: "Miscellaneous: More of the same."

After these edits by Debresser, the Talmud page has shrunk from 71578 characters to 26456 characters, which constitutes a reduction of 63 percent.

I have recently been making a number of edits to Wikiquote's Censorship page. I strongly urge everyone to visit that page now and reflect upon its message, especially as it pertains to the present situation.

If one inspects the Talmud page in other languages, one finds that the situation is much the same. If one visits the German version of the page, for example, one sees only a handful of quotes. But if one inspects the page's revision history, a familiar pattern emerges: quotes are added by some and then removed by others. The consequence is that it is hardly possible to quote from the Talmud at all.

If Wikiquote is becoming a censorious zone, then the problem is much larger than the Talmud page in particular. Consider the dangerous precedent that these edits establish. It is simply not possible to contribute difficult truths to Wikiquote if anyone can censor anything for any reason.

On a final note, I think Rich Farmbrough made a very good suggestion: to split the page into various divisions, with only the most famous quotes being kept on the main page. Seeing as the Talmud is so large, some organization is definitely called for. I propose to create the subpage Talmud/Jesus in the Talmud, which could be linked to the Wikipedia page Jesus in the Talmud. Then the Talmud page could link to that subpage, as well as to other subpages about other topics. Instead of a single page about the Talmud, one would have a tree of pages, with the Talmud page as the root page.

That is all. Thank you for your attention. 81.167.4.189 18:02, 20 October 2022 (UTC)


 * All the quotes i removed were removed for the simple reason that they are not often quoted and for the largest part do not carry a deep and general meaning. In addition, most quotes related to three issues: Jesus, gentiles and sex with minors. These are simply not the kind of quotes that become famous. The point being that, as Rich has already said, this is Wikiquote, not Wikibooks. Debresser (talk) 23:59, 20 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I think the existence of the Wikipedia page Jesus in the Talmud, which currently has 119 references, goes to show that these passages are quite famous already. As for deeper meaning, I would refer to the quote by Rabbi Michael Skobac, which you deleted, where he states that some Jews hold the view that the Talmudic teachings about Jesus have greater authority than the Gospels. That you feel entitled to delete so much with so little justification is the problem here. 81.167.4.189 01:17, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, everyone. I have created the subpage Talmud/Jesus in the Talmud. The page links to the Wikipedia page Jesus in the Talmud and quotes the most famous passages about Jesus in the Talmud, along with some commentary explaining difficult terms. There is also a section with quotes from books and talks about the subject.

Feel free to provide feedback here, or on the talk page. 81.167.4.189 15:26, 23 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Update: I have created the page Quran/Jesus in the Quran, which is a subpage of the Quran page in the same way that Talmud/Jesus in the Talmud is a subpage of the Talmud page. Furthermore, the page Jesus in the Quran redirects to Quran/Jesus in the Quran, and the page Jesus in the Talmud redirects to Talmud/Jesus in the Talmud. Finally, I have added links to both under the "See also" section of the Jesus page. 81.167.4.189 16:39, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-21, 07:53


Abusive username && spam. Lemonaka (talk) 07:55, 21 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ by stewards. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:39, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-22, 20:51


Edits on Shrek‎. Lemonaka (talk) 20:51, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ by stews. Lemonaka (talk) 07:45, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-23, 07:15


VAN. Lemonaka (talk) 07:46, 23 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ --Ferien (talk) 09:52, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-23, 09:53


Vandalism-only IP. Lemonaka (talk) 10:22, 23 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ Blocked for 2 weeks as there was quite a bit of vandalism from this IP over multiple weeks. --Ferien (talk) 13:49, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-25, 12:55


Persistent disruptive editing such as adding false or unnecessary content to Ed, Edd n Eddy (season 1) and The Powerpuff Girls. Requesting page protection for Ed, Edd n Eddy (season 1) as it has been vandalized on a weekly basis for the past couple months.

Spiritoftheeast1993 (talk) 13:08, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I've protected the page. ~ UDScott (talk) 13:35, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-25, 13:08


Repeatedly vandalized Ed, Edd n Eddy (season 4) by adding false info.

Spiritoftheeast1993 (talk) 13:11, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I've protected the page. ~ UDScott (talk) 13:35, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-25, 13:11


Repeatedly vandalized Ed, Edd n Eddy (season 5) by adding false info. I suspect a connection with another vandal who made similar edits on Ed, Edd n Eddy (season 4) (see above).

Spiritoftheeast1993 (talk) 13:15, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I've protected the page. ~ UDScott (talk) 13:35, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-26, 15:00


Likely a sockpuppet for an IP user who has been disruptively reverting other people's edits on The Adventures of Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius/Season 1 for the past couple months. Other sockpuppet accounts include 2600:6C50:737F:85AD:1004:E901:BBC:FAC6, 2600:6c50:737f:85ad:c4aa:9cf:b3fd:7dc, 2600:6c50:737f:85ad:c043:f742:dd23:37ee, 2600:6c50:737f:85ad:7595:4a9e:b102:574e, and 2600:6c50:737f:85ad:4d16:e460:a782:b1a6 who have made identical disruptive edits on the same page. Requesting page protection for The Adventures of Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius/Season 1.

Spiritoftheeast1993 (talk) 16:09, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I've reverted the latest changes and protected the page. ~ UDScott (talk) 19:46, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-26, 20:10


Cross-wiki vandal harassing User:Hey man its josh. Reported to SRG as well. Blaze Wolf (talk) 20:33, 26 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ Reported at Meta. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:38, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-28, 09:42


vandalism-only account, personal attack --Saroj Uprety (talk) 09:48, 28 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:59, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-28, 12:02


Vandalism. Lemonaka (talk) 12:02, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ by UDScott. Lemonaka (talk) 01:07, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-28, 12:23
vandalism-only account Saroj Uprety (talk) 12:26, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ by UDScott. Lemonaka (talk) 01:08, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-29, 01:08
Vandalism. Lemonaka (talk) 01:09, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Also Lemonaka (talk) 01:16, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Also Lemonaka (talk) 01:16, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ all three —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:03, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Koavf now as Lemonaka (talk) 02:14, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:29, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-29, 09:27


vandalism. --Saroj Uprety (talk) 09:29, 29 October 2022 (UTC)


 * @Koavf persistent vandalism Saroj Uprety (talk) 05:08, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:11, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-29, 11:09


Vandalism only, please protect Joseph Stalin‎ or create a filter. Lemonaka (talk) 11:24, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Now, and  CC  Lemonaka (talk) 13:07, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Also Lemonaka (talk) 13:18, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * All of the IPs are open proxies (obviously) and should be blocked accordingly. It's the usual pest.  Java Hurricane  13:28, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * If this is a usual vandal, an abuse filter may be set for them. The IP range is so wide even range block might be effortless. Lemonaka (talk) 13:34, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I think you mean "effective" rather than "effortless", but yes, this is part of a pattern of abuse. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:53, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, I mean effectless... Because they are 41.xx, 103.xx, 154.xx, and /or 188.xx. Lemonaka (talk) 16:57, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, we all learned something today. But yes, if you have a solution for this person, I, the Wikmedia Foundation, and the Chicago police force would thank you. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:12, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Nope, obviously I don't have a solution for person. But how about harsh abuse filter with block feature on common web links they used? Lemonaka (talk) 17:17, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * There are filters for some of his common nonsense, but he just changes the nonsense. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:23, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, it looks very difficult, and if they always change the form of vandalism, indeed the filter will become effectless. Lemonaka (talk) 17:27, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * While we talking, they came again. Lemonaka (talk) 17:29, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:29, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * now cc  Lemonaka (talk) 04:42, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:58, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

A list of protection
After I have carefully analyzed the character of the vandal, here comes an idea. I propose to protect the following page. Talk page related to the topic should also be protected when necessary. Hopefully this would help.--Lemonaka (talk) 05:07, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Talk:Vladimir Putin
 * 2) Vladimir Putin
 * 3) Stalinism‎
 * 4) Talk:Stalinism‎
 * 5) Joseph Stalin
 * 6) Talk:Joseph Stalin


 * All but one of those were already protected. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:10, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, let's wait and see will they change target Lemonaka (talk) 05:12, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Now
 * Talk:Massacre
 * Massacre
 * Talk:Genocide
 * Genocide
 * After reverting. Lemonaka (talk) 14:10, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:19, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah, this vandal asshole was still trying to guess my password again and again, give me several of notices. Lemonaka (talk) 16:18, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, they won't actually get into your account. They are just doing it to try and scare you.--Ferien (talk) 16:24, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Now
 * Talk:Genocide denial
 * Genocide denial
 * After reverts. Lemonaka (talk) 06:15, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:52, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-10-31, 14:11


Submitting blatantly false information in Total Drama Action (and all related articles), among other things, and hiding behind IP addresses doing the same thing, refusing to accept that their edits were dead-wrong. These users really need to be blocked, severely. 157.97.134.143 15:10, 31 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ Blocked for one week. If there are other accounts or IPs, please let me know. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:53, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

One week is not enough for that user's blatant nonsense. At least a year and no access to any talk pages is sufficient. And the user's IP address (who made a half-baked (and likely false) promise not to do it) listed above must also be punished the same way. 157.97.134.105 01:29, 2 November 2022 (UTC)


 * This account has made one edit across all WMF projects. Someone can be allowed a mistake. This isn't like he put shock images and links to malware in an article. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:40, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * But he's also a sockpuppet of Evilasio DP. Jr2, who is still blocked for making the same major errors. 157.97.134.105 01:43, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes, then blocking both accounts as obvious sockpuppets is totally appropriate. Creating two accounts to get around a ban is obviously out of bounds. Making one edit from an account and one from an IP is another. Thanks. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:46, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * And for the record, the IP was previously blocked nearly a year ago for the same vandalism the IP committed recently. 157.97.134.105 01:48, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-2, 01:32


Removing essential dialogue without any viable explanation (though judging from the IP's submissions, likely a sockuppet of Fourlaxers, a long-abandoned biased account). Plus, he claims that the dialogue from the Family Guy episode: Seashore Shell Party where Meg finally gains the gall to stand up to her family is "too cruel". Only he thinks that way. But he should never edit based on his personal bias (he shouldn't even edit at all). Please block this IP address (which has been a huge problem for over a year now) for good. 157.97.134.105 01:39, 2 November 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ Blocked for a week again. The edits are inappropriate and seem to be abusing multiple accounts, but as with the above, blocking for good or for a year seems very excessive at this point. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:43, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * You may want to consider this (abandoned) sockpuppet, who pretty much made the same biased edits. 157.97.134.105 01:46, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * This kind of context is very important for your initial reports, so 1.) thank you and 2.) please don't bury the lead in the future. Someone making one edit from an account and then later doing the same thing from an IP is not appropriate, but could easily be a mistake or something done in the heat of the moment. Someone making multiple accounts and using IPs to make a series of edits and get around blocks is wildly inappropriate. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:51, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * 157, thanks again. See my global lock requests at Meta. If you find more of this, please let me know and I'll block here and request a global lock. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:07, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-2, 15:33


Vandalism. Saroj Uprety (talk) 15:34, 2 November 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ blocks and protection and some diff deletion. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:27, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-2, 16:24


LTA. Ameisenigel (talk) 16:25, 2 November 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ globally —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:27, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-2, 21:09


Vandalism only.Lemonaka (talk) 21:09, 2 November 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ Blocked for a week. Had his vandalism been more egregious, it would have been longer. In case you see him up to shenanigans after a week, I'll block for longer or indefinitely if it seems like that's necessary. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:45, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-3, 06:04


LTA. Saroj Uprety (talk) 06:07, 3 November 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:47, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Please protect
That vandal came again. Lemonaka (talk) 15:47, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Talk:Crime‎
 * 2) Crime‎


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:31, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Talk:Homicide
 * Homicide
 * Now again. Lemonaka (talk) 00:05, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:08, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Lemonaka (talk) 00:09, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-4, 03:18


Vandalism. Saroj Uprety (talk) 03:47, 4 November 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ Deleted but not blocked, as only one edit. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:15, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * However, they have been confirmed as p2p proxies on enwiki so I have blocked those IPs as proxies. --Ferien (talk) 13:02, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-4, 04:16


Vandalism. Saroj Uprety (talk) 04:35, 4 November 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅, reported at m: —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:51, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * vandalism again with a new account . Saroj Uprety (talk) 13:43, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ by someone else. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:20, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-6, 00:03


See contribs. Lock evasion of MissesJeezer69. Styyx (talk) 00:05, 6 November 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ reported to m: —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:17, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * And globally locked by the stews... --Ferien (talk) 13:01, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-6, 22:32, GRP (let's try reporting rather than clogging RCs and history, as suggested at VP)


GRP, Foundation-banned user, latest p2p proxy, the usual. Antandrus (talk) 22:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:01, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-7, 09:23
This page he vandalized could not be protected, please check if this is an open proxy, if yes, please request at m:SRG.
 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:35, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-7, 15:02


vandalism. --Saroj Uprety (talk) 15:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ - blocked and changed visibility of their edits. ~ UDScott (talk) 16:00, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-7, 23:50


Check CA, sockpuppetry. Lemonaka (talk) 23:51, 7 November 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ Reported at m:. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:59, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-8, 00:25, GRP


The latest from this daily pest. Please either speedy delete Talk:Morning and protect for a bit, or replace with 'talkheader' and semiprotect. Thanks in advance - Antandrus (talk) 01:28, 8 November 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:33, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-8, 01:38


Vandalism only account. Lemonaka (talk) 01:50, 8 November 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:33, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-8, 02:34


Vandalism. Saroj Uprety (talk) 03:27, 8 November 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:33, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

New report 2022-11-8, 08:17


Could there be a tool to report this with just one click? Lemonaka (talk) 08:19, 8 November 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅. Yes, there probably could be a gadget for that, but I'm not smart enough to make it. :/ —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:27, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I will try to write one. But I'm also dumb, will take time. Lemonaka (talk) 08:34, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * @Koavf I have made it, please insert mw.loader.load('//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User:Lemonaka/WD.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript'); to your common.js and it will be loaded Lemonaka (talk) 08:39, 8 November 2022 (UTC)