Re: General spam vs. specific spam

Report:Spam is usually used to report spam pages that you have found or to ask help dealing with a spam bot on your wiki. For example, let's say there is a guy who is spamming a lot on your wiki, you can ask our help there, or if while surfing on a wiki you found a page which is spam, you report it there. That works as well if you are not sure if it's spam or not. Of course, if you trace back the user who created the spam page please add a link as well.

Report:Users it's usually used when you notice someone is attacking multiple wikis or let's say you have blocked a spammer on your wiki, you report it to us so we can check all his global contributions. Since spammer usually attack multiple wiki, even if you have blocked and cleaned a spammer on your wiki, please report him to us as well. (Vandals instead usually act locally)

In the end, we always check every contributions and both pages works, but Report:Users uses a template which add useful links for us to do it, that's why I said to use that to report a specific user. If you want, you can also add a brief comment aside the template there or in the edit summary. To sum up, I'd say that Report:Users is "I found a guy which is probably a spammer" while Report:Spam is "I found some spam pages" or "My wiki is under attack, please help me". leviathan_89 12:28, November 26, 2012 (UTC)

removed a name to help bypass the spam filter so new reports can be added

Hey, the spam filter should be disabled on this wiki. Are you running into problems? -- RansomTime 14:38, May 27, 2013 (UTC)

Yes. The "Pandora charms" entry for User-lookup (without the space) triggers the following message:
The following link, text or pagename is what triggered our spam filter:
pandora charms (Block #24984)
I tried adding punctuation to the user name to bypass the filter, but that didn't work, so I removed it. Seeing it work with the space, I have added the name back in and added a note about my alteration.
I've let staff know, sorry for the trouble -- RansomTime 14:49, May 27, 2013 (UTC)
Ok, filters have been switched off on the VSTF wiki again. Let me know if you see any more weirdness -- RansomTime 15:53, May 27, 2013 (UTC)

spam blogs

I have created Report:Spam blogs :). — Jr Mime (talk) 17:05, December 14, 2014 (UTC)

Since this is something new that's only showed up in the last few days, it looks like it's a team of people manually adding the spam. I'll add the new report to my browser's speed dial and use that in the future. —RRabbit42 (leave a message) 17:11, December 14, 2014 (UTC)
We do have a bot that reports them, but we don't have one that will add them all. They keep changing their format and links, it's hard to track them all. This is an easier way to track them, though. Add links, we delete and clean them all :). — Jr Mime (talk) 17:15, December 14, 2014 (UTC)

RE: Wiki report


if there is any spam or vandalism to clean up, you can report it in Report:Spam or Report:Vandalism. The Wikia in his main content was okay so it doesn't need a complete deletion.

"past under his Popestol and Wynstol accounts as well as about a dozen IP addresses." -> If you have more problems in this case you should contact a staff. KillingIconMedic.png Cyanide3 08:22, January 30, 2015 (UTC)

Both of those accounts have already been dealt with and have been disabled. At the moment, I am not aware of any other spam or vandalism by this person. There is some, but it is on a wiki he created, so even though it is the same as what he has used to commit vandalism on a lot of wikis, it doesn't count.
What I was saying when I left you this message is that the report he made to close the Boyster Wiki is a false statement. He did this because he had vandalized the wiki and it didn't work. So five months later, he tries another kind of vandalism by filing a false report to have the wiki closed. If you look at his talk page, his edits and the block log for his account, you will see that he tried the same thing last month for the Boj Wiki. He had tried earlier in December to get the Boj Wiki shut down under his TGMX account.
He has been committing vandalism under many sockpuppet accounts for at least two years. I wanted you to be aware that this one report was not a random incident or a misunderstanding. It's another kind of vandalism, and the fact that he is willing to try again about a half year later is further proof that he is not going to give up vandalism any time soon. —RRabbit42 (leave a message) 14:57, January 30, 2015 (UTC)

Entering = instead of '=' in Report:Vandalism template

Whenever you want to include within the Report template a URL containing the '=' sign without breaking the template, replace any instance of '=' with =. That is all; I specified the URL you wanted to convey with that simple coding trick on your report regarding that grieving sock. ​‑‑SilSinn9801💬 00:56, March 25, 2019 (UTC)

269 accounts?

Well, this is not meant to immortalize some particular sockpuppeteer, but how can you comprehensively keep track of that many socks (and even remember their usernames)? I even lost count of all the names of the socks used by that other Grieving sockmaster (whose name I also no longer want to immortalize).

I don’t think anybody has ever listed that many different sock usernames in a single VSTF report. And, surprisingly, the {{Report vandalism}} template does not crash with that many usernames fed into it. ‐⁠‑SilSinn9801💬 04:56, June 2, 2019 (UTC)

I pulled that list out of the Block Log and what the abuse filters log separately, then sorted it alphabetically. I didn't consider what capacity the template could handle, but if there's ever a next time I have to report a huge amount of accounts, I'll limit how many I put in. Though he changes the account names often to try and get around the filters, he has patterns that are easy to spot. This includes the two new accounts that showed up in the ten minutes since I filed the report. I've even seen a couple of times where as soon as he's blocked, he's back in with a new account in less than 60 seconds.
I've been playing whack-a-mole with his accounts for at least nine months now. He's stated a few times that he's not going to stop, but this is a case where he has a compulsion to keep trying to get in. I don't think he can help himself. What it comes down to is he's been a nuisance for a very long time and it started off with him complaining about a problem he created for himself by always creating new accounts instead of continuing to edit with an existing account. End result: he's not welcome on the wiki any more. —RRabbit42 (leave a message) 05:23, June 2, 2019 (UTC)

Also not trying to immortalize him myself but I think that's a record --Draph91 (talk) 15:18, June 2, 2019 (UTC)

Your report

Hi, I replied to your report. Please let me know if it helps.--35?cb=20130911015810Rain  (talk) 13:39, August 30, 2019 (UTC)


This user is ban-evading BIG TIME. --Rodney16 (talk) 21:09, September 13, 2019 (UTC)