Wikipedia talk:Long-term abuse/Best known for IP

93.159.183.71
This is a bit stale, but thought I note is on here any. After this IP was edit warring on the Planetary science article, I filed a notice at the edit warring noticeboard on 23 July 2023. User noted that this IP seems to show similar characteristics to BKIP. Wikipedialuva (talk) 02:31, 4 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note, Wikipedialuva!
 * While at it, check out these two other recent archived ANEW threads, who I suspect are also BKFIP as well – see my comments in those threads:
 * User:217.91.19.176 reported by User:Notrealname1234 (Result: Blocked)
 * User:185.104.138.30 reported by User:Yoshi24517 (mobile) (Result: Blocked a month and page protected)
 * Lately I've noticed that BKFIP's modus operandi nowadays is to remove a (very) large quantity of content from an article, citing "unencyclopaedic" or similar as the cause, and then when an editor comes and opposes them, they use undo to revert the edit, appending the edit summary with an argument of some kind. An argument that usually attacks the editor, at least in some subtle way, typically accusing them of being inexperienced in the topic or similar. Examples:
 * see WP:IG. If you cannot identify what encyclopaedic purpose you think this set of images is serving, then you have no business adding it. Stop being disruptive.,
 * don't revert for no reason,
 * user clearly just dislikes IP edits. no convincing rationale for including this material,
 * rv vandalism by editor who is spamming my talk page with dishonest templates,
 * the user can remove messages if they like. you concern yourself with your own business and stop trolling for disruption, and
 * editors with no interest in the topic should find other ways to waste their time. Unexplained reverts are disruptive. See WP:REVEXP.).
 * They also show an intense dislike for warning templates placed on their talk page, usually using the "undo" button to also remove them from their talk page, sometimes appending the edit summary with something like the following examples:
 * oh, here's another templating scumbag,
 * if you repeatedly spam my talk page with templates, your intent is evidently purely to be annoying,
 * go away, template-spamming vandal. write your own words if you have something serious to say,
 * removed stupid and dishonest messages. — AP 499D25  (talk)  02:59, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

51.52.241.154
- «Undid revision 1177182870 by Alexander Davronov talk) learn English grammar, read MOS:N'T. stop adding low-quality content to English Wikipedia»  - «‎Adhesive:  fixed a lot of incompetence»  - «Undid revision 1177021123 by Alexander Davronov talk) try again once you've learned better English and read MOS:N'T and MOS:& at the very least» - «fixed some incompetence, removed some cruft» - «Undid revision 1177460526 by Alexander Davronov talk) as you have been told many times before, read MOS:N'T and stop using contractions. And learn how articles are used in English if you want to contribute to English Wikipedia»

British IP. Please, take a look:

AXO NOV (talk) ⚑ 12:06, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is him, looks like an IP they've used before. WCM email 12:16, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Gary Lineker's Superstar Soccer
Some of these are already on this list, and some were blocked recently or some time ago for various reasons and lenghts, but I wanted to note that from 2019 until the article was semi-protected in 2021, several IP addresses edited the article Gary Lineker's Superstar Soccer to add the word "slag" or some variation thereof, including:



BOZ (talk) 12:29, 1 October 2023 (UTC)


 * @Favonian, in case you've been keeping up with this one, I don't know for certain if all of these are related, but WP:DUCKs will quack. BOZ (talk) 12:25, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Are you sure this is BKFIP? The edit summaries are below average on disparaging comments, and whatever else his faults, vulgarity is not among them. Favonian (talk) 12:49, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure, but when I was looking at these IP addresses, I noticed that @Ad Orientem had blocked the one starting in 82 as being related to this case, so I figured better safe than sorry. I did not know that slag is a vulgar term as it is unknown here in the US. :) So either that one IP was long-term blocked incorrectly as being part of this LTA issue, or there is some weird kind of coincidence going on, or all of these are part of it; not sure, so I'm just reporting it here. BOZ (talk) 13:05, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Slag is a colloquialism for a woman of loose moral to put into context. I'm not convinced that this is BKIP, they don't go in for that kind of petty vandalism. WCM email 14:03, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @BOZ & @Favonian. So I have been digging through page histories and my own contrib logs and this one is bothering me. I cannot find what drew my attention to that specific edit and prompted my subsequent block. I've looked at my own contrib log, and the page histories for ANI, AIV and my own talk page from that date. There is a related brief discussion where I was asked to post a different template. But for the life of me I CANNOT find what actually drew my attention to that IP range. The block log for that range is insane and has been variously linked to BKF and MariaJaydHicky. Usually when I issue a block for block evasion/LTA/socking I include a note in the block log to the effect "see AIV report..." or similar so I have a reference point in case a question comes up. Alas in this case I didn't. Based on the long history of disruption and blocks from this range, I don't have reason to believe it's a bad block. But I can't find what specifically got my attention and made me think BKF. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:33, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * We've all been there. I blocked it 6 years ago. Guess the range is "metropolitan". Room for lots of trolls, vandals, POV-pushers, and overcompensating guardians of the English language. Favonian (talk) 15:46, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Good point, I'm just now noticing that is a range block rather than a block on that specific IP address, so the "slag" vandal probably just happened to coincide with BKFIP. OK, no worries. :) BOZ (talk) 16:21, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Special:Contribs/109.144.19.219
A new British IP whose only edits have been reverting Alexander Davronov's reversions of Special:Contribs/51.52.241.154. All of their summaries are "Undid revision [number] by Alexander Davronov (talk) competence is required". – dudhhr talkcontribssheher 16:29, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thats him. Classic BKFIP but currently blocked for 2 weeks. WCM email 19:32, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I concur. Blocked 109.144.19.219 for a week. Favonian (talk) 19:36, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm like a bite for him. He never histates to go after my edits lol. What a poor thing. AXO NOV  (talk) ⚑ 05:34, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

January 2024
Special:Contribs/Hvng looks like our person. Cringe edit summaries with the usual digs at non-native speakers, condescending comments about people's grammar ("atrocious grammar", "cluelessness", "incoherent crap" etc etc) occasional removal of BKF, hints of edit warring – the usual stuff. I'd put money on it. Bretonbanquet (talk) 16:49, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I don't understand why this isn't reported at SPI.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:38, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

February 2024
Looks like BKFIP but not 100% sure as some of the edit summaries are not grammatically correct, or that could be irony? WCM email 08:19, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * BKFIP doesn't edit from the United States.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:56, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I have seen them editing from all over the world whilst travelling; including the states. For a long time they were resident overseas in Chile, moved to Australia for a while and edited from the US, Hong Kong etc.  But as I said I wasn't 100% sure. WCM email 14:05, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

May 2024
Special:Contributions/Galagalen - same style and aggressive edit summaries. Zoolver (talk) 11:25, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * No doubt. Done.Sam Kuru (talk) 13:36, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

3 Jul 2024
This Italian-based IP editor appears to be a sock of BKFIP – "passive aggressive" tone in edit summaries, large (almost indiscriminate) content removals from articles, and removal of warnings from user talk pages. They are already currently at ANI... — AP 499D25  (talk)  08:11, 3 July 2024 (UTC)