User talk:Mfb/Taiwanese articles

Page creation
I created this page to collect the activities of the disruptive Taiwan-related edits. Feel free to change the page. I pinged all users I found reverting the edits or protecting pages in multiple articles. Thanks for your help so far. --mfb (talk) 15:40, 19 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Is it about the user claiming 300km diameter for a conventional munition? Because that claim was insane. (Not even a strategic nuke can do this—only the Death Star). El_C 15:54, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I haven't seen that claim, but it would not surprise me. From the same user/group telling us that 100 kg payload is enough for human spaceflight and that we can multiply nuclear stockpile by 10-20 by adding a digit. --mfb (talk) 16:51, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * El_C, Yes the IP editor is a long term offender who has affected multiple articles. We just saw about 15-20 pages being semi-protected by AlexiusHoratius yesterday because the IP editor went on a revenge streak to undo all my edits. This is an ongoing issue for the last two months or so. I am also going to who is another involved editor. Adamgerber80 (talk) 17:18, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * mfb, I think we should approach this in 2 ways: first list is of pages where the editor is involved in POV pushing. Second a list of pages which have been affected because of the revenge streak. I will get started on the first list right away. Adamgerber80 (talk) 17:18, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Did you see the user page corresponding to this talk page? --mfb (talk) 17:29, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * sorry missed that. I will move these there. Adamgerber80 (talk) 17:33, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * All from the first list are in now (added 5 now), most from the second list should be there as well. --mfb (talk) 17:38, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * All the articles which are not Taiwan related aka India-related are the IP editors revenge streak against me. I usually edit those pages and if you look carefully he is blindly going through undoing my edits. Adamgerber80 (talk) 17:41, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Do we want to make a chart? "PageName; Number of vandaledits; Type:Addition-deletion; involved editors; IP addresses; talk page? Y/N; AIV? Y/N; Admin intervention? Y/N." L3X1 (distant write)  18:05, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, this sounds like a good idea. can you kick us off and I can start filling stuff in. Look at the corresponding article page of this page for a place to start. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 18:20, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I added the chart at the bottom of the article page, the collapse template can be removed if it is getting in the way at this early stage. Are there any other columns that need to be added? L3X1 (distant write)  19:59, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * this looks great and is a good start. I will try to fill this in when I am done with undoing his/her current edits. Thanks a lot. Adamgerber80 (talk) 20:07, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The IP editor is currently active on these pages Hypersonic speed‎, Sukhoi Su-30MKI, Bipin Rawat‎, Future of the Indian Navy Adamgerber80 (talk) 19:30, 19 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Just curious, but is this Special:Contributions/58.114.120.202 related by any chance? --Lemongirl942 (talk) 09:20, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes. You can check the corresponding page for a list of affected articles and IP's. This IP is already listed there. I did see you as on the one people reverting some these edits. Please feel free to join in and contribute to this effort. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 12:53, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Re: blocking policy
Admins, can you guys block sock IPs for like 6 months so that their links will be lined out for as long this project is on going? It would be helpful to not have to continuously check to see if a given IP is blocked or not. I know blocking policy forbids punitive blocks, what didn't know if IP socks will just get the standard 31 hour for vandalism and 7 day block for disruptive editing. Thanks. L3X1 (distant write)  03:02, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Have IPs been returned to after a block? --Neil N  talk to me 03:24, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Not that I know of, but I've only checked about 20 no-longer-blocked IPs. It appears that they are abandoned after the hammer falls. User:27.100.20.44 seems to be an exepction, first edited on Dec 23/2016, then slept till February. L3X1 (distant write)  03:31, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Unless an IP is re-used it's highly unlikely it'll be blocked for a lengthy amount of time. Admins do check for past IP blocks and adjust block time accordingly. --Neil N  talk to me 03:38, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you . User:128.90.113.179is another sleeper, but was never blocked. And 58.114.119.159 back in May 2016 was blocked, and made 2 more bad edits after the block expired. L3X1 (distant write)  03:40, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Is this guy a long term abuser?
I have a nagging feeling that this guy could be or someone related. I have now found edits which go back all the way back to 2015 but this editor does the exact opposite of the long term abuser above. Changes ROC to Taiwan. Anybody here has any thoughts on this? Adamgerber80 (talk) 04:35, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I saw that when scrolling through the list, but didn't know if I was being paranoid over the term "Taiwan" and seeing patterns where there aren't any. I think that this sock is a different LTAer. It would be nice if we could find a registered account doing the same things, but this IP is too slick, except for that one time when he forgot to hide his IP that you found. L3X1 (distant write)  04:38, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I think I found 2 user accounts which could be potentially belong to this editor. and . A single edit, each on Republic of China Navy to change ROC to TWN. The same page was earlier attacked using IP. Thoughts? Adamgerber80 (talk) 19:11, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I think these may very well be socks of the IP. I don't think they belong to Eeeeewtw because it appears he hasn't done anything since 2015. However, why would our clever friend go and create 2 VOAs when IP hopping is good enough? Unless, of course, he actually physically traveled from his location to register them, knowing that we may have his real IP, and he thinks a Checkuser would then disassociate his real IP address from these 2 accounts, leaving him and his socks free and clear. I don't think that is actually going to work, per DUCK and WP:CHK, unless the sock really believes us to be born yesterday. L3X1 (distant write)  19:49, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes the two terms are a bone of contention across all articles relating to Taiwan. Some people believe that it should be Republic of China, others prefer Taiwan. Both can be seen as correct (depending on point of view). So it is a very common type of edit and not necessarily this particular IP-hopper who is doing it. merlinVtwelve (talk) 01:52, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

rolling list?
Folks, the stuff on the user page is useful when it comes to documenting this person's disruption, but if we're looking at quickly protecting/blocking new pages/IPs as they pop up, it is not too useful, because I for one don't have the time to check each of those IPs. Would it be useful to have a section here that can be archived as needed? Or is it easier to report to AIV/RFPP and link to the userpage? Vanamonde (talk) 12:57, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I have been reporting to AIV with link to this page. I also then add the IP and affected article on this page. So far different admins have been dealing with this differently. Some choose to block the IP while others Semi-Protect pages. Adamgerber80 (talk) 13:41, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * that's fine (indeed it's probably going to be faster than posting here, especially as this phenomenon becomes well-documented and specific knowledge unnecessary) we should just make sure that everybody is doing this. Vanamonde (talk) 13:44, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Possible Range-block
For 45.254.247¬ and 45.254.246¬? I haven't finished compiling all the evidence, but I see that IP likes this range a lot. According to NinjaPirateRobot's essay on IPs, this is narrow enough to useful. Another look reveals 27.100.20¬ and 103.27.222¬ as favorite ranges. Another question, is this page only viewable by logged in users? I have some comments that I'm keeping to myself so in case the IP is gazing in awe, they won't learn how to improve their game and make our lives harder. Is such a lock possible? L3X1 (distant write)  03:19, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I just took a look and it's visible when not logged in. I also think that the IP-hopper is likely to have an account 'as well' anyway. So indeed, best keep certain thoughts private. merlinVtwelve (talk) 06:25, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Caution IP Hopper is back
, just a word of caution that the IP hopper is back. Here are two edits which resemble the same content he/she has edited in the past. Adamgerber80 (talk) 02:09, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Indeed, yes. I was hoping it would all be over... Something to keep an eye on. merlinVtwelve (talk) 08:45, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I got the ping, but don't have a lot of time to investigate things these days. Looks like Melanie protected those pages.  Is everything under control for the moment or are there currently IP's that needs blocking or pages that needs protecting? If someone gives me clear diffs and pointers to problems without me needing to do a lot of independent research I'm willing to pull the trigger if I'm around. But I think enough admins are familiar with this now that AIV would be a better bet.  --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:17, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * , It is all under control for now. This was just a heads up to be careful when there are edits from IP addresses on Taiwan-related pages. I have many of the previously affected pages still on my watch-list so things should be fine. And yes the page was protected on my request. Adamgerber80 (talk) 16:10, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I think most of them are also on my watch-list, so I think s/he will have less success this time around. merlinVtwelve (talk) 01:46, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * We also have the Related Changes. --mfb (talk) 10:18, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

September edits
174.237.1.64 was active on two Wikipedia namespace pages, claiming everyone would be a sockpuppet. So basically Wikipedia consists of Adamberger80 with his sockpuppets, and then many different IP contributors who all share the common goal of adding the same content to the same set of articles repeatedly. Do I understand that right? -- mfb Sockpuppet of Adamberger80 (talk) 16:21, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Haha. It was pretty crazy. I don't think this the end of it and the editor will definitely will be back. I wouldn't be surprised if they used this as "proof" to initiate a SPI against us. Adamgerber80 (talk) 16:33, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The editor is back . Adamgerber80 (talk) 16:29, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * And directly with a textbook example of their edits. --mfb (talk) 22:31, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

The IP hopper is back
Hi Everyone, the IP hopper is back and on a revenge spree this time. Their edits on Republic of China Armed Forces and List of anti-ship missiles were reverted. Since then the editor is using this IP addresses for disruptive revengeful editing. ,, , , , , and many more. Adamgerber80 (talk) 08:21, 10 January 2018 (UTC)


 * ? Has overlap with two of the IPs. --mfb (talk) 04:57, 12 January 2018 (UTC)


 * No is a different user who continues to add to a single article Vinod Vashisht. The IP hopper latched onto my reverts on this article and was edit warring. Adamgerber80 (talk) 05:18, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay. --mfb (talk) 05:29, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The IP hopper has found a new set of articles here AIDC F-CK-1 Ching-kuo, Fifth-generation jet fighter‎, Sky Sword II, Tsai Ing-wen. I have them on my watchlist but there are many Taiwan related articles which might have gone unnoticed. Adamgerber80 (talk) 05:33, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * ,, , (quite active, for one week),  ... Sky Sword II was on the predicted watchlist already, Fifth-generation jet fighter had previous vandalism, the other two are new. --mfb (talk) 07:41, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hypersonic flight - that was easy. --mfb (talk) 07:50, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah I somehow missed this one. Now it is on my watchlist. I will survey some other auxillary articles today/tomorrow to check the damage done by the latest wave of edits on unwatched pages. I think we should create a LTA page for this user. This disruption has now gone on long enough. What do you think? Adamgerber80 (talk) 08:01, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I noticed that you're having an IP hopping issue with some articles. How long has this been going on? Who is this user? Do we know?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   08:06, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * How long: At least one year. This September 2016 edit is the earliest clear one I find right now, but this Feb 2015 edit is probably the same user. The first large wave that was identified as such was January 2017. We don't know who that is, it could even be multiple users. We don't have an edit count, but it is at least in the high three-digit numbers. --mfb (talk) 08:19, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I went deeper down the rabbit hole, and I think I found IPs where the user starts the pattern, in particular, with the first Jan29 edit as the first "classical" one, the previous edits were a bit different. Related IPs from that time: (made edits again in 2017),  and . --mfb (talk) 08:31, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi I think the IPs has been around since early early 2015. We ran into the IPs and discovered the scale of disruption around early January 2017. There is little information available on the IPs itself or whether they were an existing editor  gone rogue. But for the last year or so, we have uncovered some aspects on how they work. First, the disruption is primarily related to Taiwan related articles with a POV towards Taiwan. If these edits are reverted, then the IPs goes on a revengeful streak which includes reverting one's edits on any pages. For example, I primarily contribute to Indian defence related pages and the IP will revert all my edits blindly (and this is currently going on). Since the IPs are from a VPN and very rapidly changing, some admins have suggested to go by the page protection route. Please let me know if you have more questions. I think a LTA might be in order. At some moment in time I thought if this was Long-term_abuse/Eeeeeewtw but it seems this an entirely new person(s). Adamgerber80 (talk) 14:04, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Did you have some action in mind? --mfb (talk) 06:42, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * ,, . Does this look familiar? Adamgerber80 (talk) 08:32, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * also looks like he's using and  too. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 08:59, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Revert, block if necessary, and add them to the pile of IPs? The pattern looks similar enough. Interesting to learn that Pakistan might have killed the whole world population 100 times. --mfb (talk) 09:01, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * These IPs aren't within any specific range (maybe a small percentage of them, but not a significant number). The best thing to do? Report the IPs to AIV and request frequently-hit pages to be protected at RFPP. That's how we're going to stop this, or at least start the process of taking action... :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   21:16, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * That's what we do already - and what we did the whole last year. --mfb (talk) 03:18, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes we currently do this but it does get cumbersome at times when the IP goes on a revengeful streak. I believe last time the IP used Vypr-VPN and quite a few of the IP ranges of this VPN were blocked. It seems the IP has switched over to a different VPN. Can we explore also the doing the same for this? Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 04:40, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Adamgerber80 - Sure, I understand (trust me... haha). I don't see why not; do we know what VPN this user is currently using now?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:43, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * So it appears to me that the IP hopper still uses VyprVPN. All that has happened is VyprVPN does not publish their host IP's anymore. But if you check the locations they match up with the WHOIS on all those IPs. It seems there is little we can do for now. Adamgerber80 (talk) 05:06, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * It's most likely because they change frequently so they stopped listing them so they didn't have to update it...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:13, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

The IP hopper is back once again on Talk:Sky Sword II
Hey Guys, The IP hopper is back on the page and it seems this time they are going to be here for some time. Adamgerber80 (talk) 12:41, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Better on the talk page than in articles. --mfb (talk) 00:54, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * We spoke too soon. Checkout Sky Bow, Tuo Chiang-class corvette, AIDC F-CK-1 Ching-kuo‎. Adamgerber80 (talk) 14:28, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks Adamgerber80, I thought this problem had ended. I am still on a Wikibreak but will do my best to keep an eye on any relevant articles. merlinVtwelve (talk) 20:43, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * It might be easier just to wait for the pages to be semi before reverting them. Also, who was the last admin active with this LTA. Adamgerber80 (talk) 02:10, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The article has been temporarily semi'd for disruption ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:07, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Sanity check
Hey Everyone, can someone look at Yun Feng. A new registered editor is editing very similar to our Taiwanese IP hopper. Although, this is not your modus operandi but it would ideal if someone else did a sanity check as well. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 22:12, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Still Kicking
Even in 2019. Stikkyy t/c 05:02, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Not sure. Similar style but something feels different. In addition it is an IPv6. Reverted their third attempt. --mfb (talk) 13:01, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I’ve been dealing with this series of vandals for a few months, I don’t think they're actually trying to make Taiwan look good but more a poison the well sort of thing. The nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons claims in particular are just plain odd... and in my opinion make this vandalism particularly problematic. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 22:04, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Home IP
Just a question. Does this editor have a known home IP address? AnUnnamedUser  (open talk page)  23:56, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
 * And by the way, is there a possibility of contacting his VPN provider and making him lose access to it? AnUnnamedUser   (open talk page)  00:24, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
 * You can run a lookup on all the IPs and send emails to the various addresses given for abuse. I don't expect a high success rate. --mfb (talk) 03:00, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Is it just me or will the Admins not take this seriously without a known home IP address? Horse Eye Jack (talk) 19:29, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I just got threatened with a boomerang by RudolfRed at the Help Desk for the reverts on Corvette. Sincerely doubt they will take it seriously. Llammakey (talk) 19:38, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't think that is the problem. The vandalism is quite well-documented here. But even assuming you find an address that looks like the home IP from their ISP: What is next? How much will an ISP in Taiwan (?) care about the English Wikipedia, especially as most edits are not easy to connect to that user? --mfb (talk) 21:31, 13 August 2019 (UTC)