විකිපීඩියා:විනාශකිරීම - විකිපීඩියා

විකිපීඩියා:විනාශකිරීම - විකිපීඩියා
Jump to content
විකිපීඩියා වෙතින්
Policy on deliberate editing to obstruct or defeat Wikipedia's purpose
සැකිල්ල:SHORTDESC:Policy on deliberate editing to obstruct or defeat Wikipedia's purpose
"WP:VANDAL" මෙතැනට යළියොමුවෙයි. policies on vandalism-only accounts සඳහා,
Wikipedia:Vandalism-only account
බලන්න. the essay on the word "vandal" සඳහා,
Wikipedia:Avoid the word "vandal"
බලන්න. reporting instances of vandalism සඳහා,
Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism
බලන්න. and සඳහා,
Wikipedia:Requests for page protection
බලන්න. the encyclopedic article on vandalism on Wikipedia සඳහා,
Vandalism on Wikipedia
බලන්න.
Wikipedia:Disruptive editing
සමග වරදවා වටහා ගැනීමෙන් වළකින්න.
මෙම පිටුව ඉංග්‍රීසි විකිපීඩියාවේ
නිල ප්‍රතිපත්තිවල
සිංහල පරිවර්ථනයක් ලෙස ආරම්භ කරණලදී.
ඉංග්‍රීසි විකිපීඩියාවේ පරිශීලකයන් අතර මේ පිලිබඳ පුළුල් පිලිගැනීමක් ඇති අතර එහි සියළු පරිශීලකයන් පිලිපැදියයුතු සම්මතය ලෙස සැලකේ. මෙම පිටුව සංස්කරණය කරන විට, කරැණාකාර ඔබගේ සංශෝධනය
පොදු එකඟත්වය
මත පැවරෙනවාදැයි සහතික කරන්න. දෙගිඩියාවෙන් සිටින විට, ප්‍රථමයෙන්
සාකච්ජා පිටුවෙහි
සාකච්ජා කර සිටින්න.
කෙටි මං
WP:VAND
WP:VD
WP:VANDAL
මෙම පිටුවේ අඩංගු කරුණු සැකෙවින්:
Intentionally making abusive edits to Wikipedia will result in
blocks
and/or
bans
Are you in the right place?
This page is for documenting and explaining the English Wikipedia
policy
on vandalism.
Do you need to report persistent vandalism or spam to an
administrator
File a vandalism report
Do you need to report an inappropriate username or an account with a username that blatantly violates Wikipedia's
username policy
File a username report
Do you need to report an
edit war
or
three-revert rule
violation to an administrator?
File an edit war report
Are you currently blocked from editing Wikipedia and wish to request an unblock? You can resolve this matter by
appealing your block
Are you trying to request page protection on an article?
Request page protection
Are you trying to request removal of page protection on an article?
Request a change in page protection level
Do you want to request an edit be made to a protected article?
Create an edit request
Do you need help with resolving a dispute with another editor? See
Dispute resolution
Do you need to report or discuss a policy violation or behavioral issue (such as an evasion of a
block
, abuse of tools, or other incidents) on Wikipedia that requires administrator intervention?
File an incident report
Do you need to report libel or confidential information posted to Wikipedia?
Contact the oversight team
විනාශකිරීම
Dealing with vandalism
Obvious vandalism
Sockpuppet investigations
Long term abuse reports
Reporting IP address abuse
WikiProject on open proxies
උදවු & සමිපත්
Cleaning up vandalism
Counter-vandalism tools
වැඩිදුර තොරතුරු
Blocking IP addresses
Do not insult the vandals
WikiProject Vandalism studies
නරඹන්න
සාකච්ඡාව
සංස්කරණය
කල්ක්‍රියා ප්‍රතිපත්ති
සභ්‍යබව
නිර්මල ඇරඹුම
එකඟතාව
ආරෝවන් සමන
සංස්කරණ ප්‍රතිවිරෝධතා
සංස්කරණ ප්‍රතිපත්තිය
හිරිහැරකිරීම්
පුද්ගලයින්ට පහරදීම් නොකරන්න
ලිපි වල හිමිකාරිත්වය
රූකඩ නැටවීම
පරිශීලක නාම ප්‍රතිපත්තිය
විනාශකිරීම්
On Wikipedia,
vandalism
has a very specific meaning: editing (or other behavior)
deliberately
intended to
obstruct or defeat
the
project's purpose
, which is to create a free encyclopedia, in a variety of languages, presenting the sum of all human knowledge.
The malicious
removal
of encyclopedic content, or the changing of such content beyond all recognition, without any regard to our core content policies of
neutral point of view
(which does not mean
no point of view
),
verifiability
and
no original research
, is a
deliberate
attempt to damage Wikipedia. There are, of course, more juvenile forms of vandalism, such as adding irrelevant
obscenities or crude humor
to a page, illegitimately
blanking pages
, and inserting obvious nonsense into a page. Abusive creation or usage of user accounts and IP addresses may also constitute vandalism.
Vandalism is prohibited.
While editors are encouraged to
warn
and
educate
vandals, warnings are by no means a prerequisite for blocking a vandal (although administrators usually block only when multiple warnings have been issued).
Even if misguided, willfully against
consensus
, or
disruptive
, any
good faith
effort to improve the encyclopedia is
not
vandalism.
For example,
edit warring
over how exactly to present encyclopedic content is not vandalism. Careful consideration may be required to differentiate between edits that are beneficial, edits that are detrimental but well-intentioned, and edits that are vandalism. If it is clear that an editor is intending to improve Wikipedia, their edits are not vandalism,
even if
they violate some core policy of Wikipedia. Mislabeling good faith edits "vandalism" can be harmful, as it makes users less likely to respond to corrective advice or to engage collaboratively during a disagreement. For that reason, avoid using the term "vandalism" unless it is clear the user means to harm Wikipedia; this is even true when warning a user with a
user warning template
. Choose the template that most closely matches the behavior you are trying to correct.
Types of vandalism
සංස්කරණය
කෙටි මග
WP:VANDTYPES
Vandalism on Wikipedia usually falls into one or more of these categories:
Abuse of tags
සංස්කරණය
Bad faith placing of non-content tags such as {{
afd
}}, {{
db
}}, {{
sprotected
}}, or other tags on pages that do not meet such criteria. This includes baseless removal of {{
policy
}} and related tags.
Account creation, malicious
සංස්කරණය
Creating accounts with usernames that contain deliberately offensive or disruptive terms is considered vandalism, whether the account is used or not. For Wikipedia's policy on what is considered inappropriate for a username, see
Wikipedia:Username policy
. See also
Wikipedia:Sock puppetry
Avoidant vandalism
සංස්කරණය
Removing {{
afd
}}, {{
copyvio
}} and other related tags in order to conceal deletion candidates or avert deletion of such content. However, this is often mistakenly done by new users who are unfamiliar with AfD procedures and such users should be given the benefit of the doubt and pointed to the proper page to discuss the issue.
Blanking, illegitimate
සංස්කරණය
legitimate cases of blanking articles සඳහා,
Wikipedia:Redirect#Redirects that replace previous articles
බලන්න
කෙටි මග
WP:NOBLANK
Removing encyclopedic content
without any reason, or replacing such content with nonsense. Content removal is
not
considered to be vandalism when the reason for the removal of the content is readily apparent by examination of the content itself, or where a non-frivolous explanation for the removal of apparently legitimate content is provided, linked to, or referenced in an edit summary.
Blanking that could be legitimate includes blanking all or part of a
biography of a living person
. Wikipedia is especially concerned about providing accurate and unbiased information on the living; blanking may be an effort to remove inaccurate or biased material. Due to the possibility of unexplained good faith content removal, {{
uw-test1
}} or {{
uw-delete1
}}, as appropriate, should be used as initial warnings for content removals without more descriptive edit summaries.
Repeated uploading of copyrighted material
සංස්කරණය
Uploading or using material on Wikipedia in ways which violate
Wikipedia's copyright policies
after having been warned is vandalism. Because users may be unaware that the information is copyrighted, or of Wikipedia policies on how such material may and may not be used, such action becomes vandalism
only
if it continues after the copyrighted nature of the material and relevant policy restricting its use have been communicated to the user.
Edit summary vandalism
සංස්කරණය
Making offensive edit summaries in an attempt to leave a mark that cannot be easily expunged from the record (edit summaries cannot simply be "reverted" and require
administrative action
if they have to be removed from a page's history). Often combined with malicious account creation.
Format vandalism
සංස්කරණය
Changing the formatting of a page unreasonably and maliciously. But many times, editors might just make an unintended mistake or are testing how the wikicode works. Sometimes it might be a bug in the Wikipedia software. Some changes to the format are not vandalism, but rather either good faith edits of editors who don't know the guidelines or simply a different opinion on how the format should look, in which case it is just a disputed edit.
Gaming the system
සංස්කරණය
Deliberate attempts to circumvent enforcement of Wikipedia policies, guidelines, and procedures by causing bad faith edits to go unnoticed. Includes marking bad faith edits as minor to get less scrutiny, making a minor edit following a bad faith edit so it won't appear on all watchlists, recreating previously deleted bad faith creations under a new title, use of the {{
construction
}} tag to prevent deletion of a page that would otherwise be a clear candidate for deletion, or use of
sock puppets
Hidden vandalism
සංස්කරණය
Any form of vandalism that makes use of embedded text, which is not visible to the final rendering of the article but visible during editing. This includes link vandalism, or placing malicious, offensive, or otherwise disruptive or irrelevant messages or spam in hidden comments for editors to see.
Hoaxing vandalism
සංස්කරණය
Deliberately adding falsities to articles, particularly to
biographies of living people
, with hoax information is considered vandalism.
Image vandalism
සංස්කරණය
Uploading shock images, inappropriately placing explicit images on pages, or simply using any image in a way that is disruptive. Please note though that
Wikipedia is not censored
and that explicit images may be uploaded and/or placed on pages for legitimate reasons (that is, if they have encyclopedic value).
Link vandalism
සංස්කරණය
Adding or changing internal or external links on a page to disruptive, irrelevant, or inappropriate targets while disguising them with mislabeling.
Page creation, illegitimate
සංස්කරණය
Creating new pages with the sole intent of malicious behavior. It also includes
personal attack pages
(articles written to disparage the subject),
hoaxes
and other intentionally inaccurate pages. There are many other types of pages that merit deletion, even
speedy deletion
, but which are not vandalism.
New users
sometimes create test pages containing
nonsense
or even autobiographies, and doing so is not vandalism; such pages can also be moved to become their sandbox or userpage. Pages on non-notable topics are not vandalism.
Blatant advertising pages
, and
blatant POV pushes
, are not vandalism, but frequently happen and often lead to editors being blocked. It's important that people creating inappropriate pages be given appropriate communication; even if they aren't willing to edit within our rules, they are more likely to go away quietly if they understand why their page has been deleted.
Page lengthening, illegitimate
සංස්කරණය
Adding very large (measured by the number of
bytes
) amounts of bad faith content to a page so as to make the page's load time abnormally long or even make the page impossible to load on some computers without the browser or machine crashing. Adding large amounts of good faith content is not vandalism, though prior to doing so, one should consider if splitting a long page may be appropriate (see
Wikipedia:Article size
).
Page-move vandalism
සංස්කරණය
කෙටි මං
WP:MOVEVANDAL
WP:PAGEMOVEVANDAL
WP:MOVEVAND
Changing the names of pages to disruptive, irrelevant, or otherwise inappropriate names. Only
autoconfirmed or confirmed
users can move pages. Because of this, vandals of this variety will often create "sleeper" accounts to gain autoconfirmed status.
Redirect vandalism
සංස්කරණය
Redirecting
or changing the target of redirect pages to other pages that are vandalism, nonsense, promotional, non-existent pages, or attack pages. This also applies when a redirect or its title is created only to disparage its subject. Pages that redirect to non-existent or deleted pages are also applied with
G8
Reverting to vandalism
සංස්කරණය
Reverting edits to the latest revisions that are nonsense, promotional, personal attacks, and/or harassment (except for when done by mistake).
Silly vandalism
සංස්කරණය
Adding
profanity
graffiti
, or
patent nonsense
to pages; creating nonsensical and obviously unencyclopedic pages, etc. This is one of the most common forms of vandalism. However, the addition of random characters to pages is often characteristic of an editing test and, though impermissible, may not be malicious.
Subtle vandalism
සංස්කරණය
කෙටි මග
WP:SNEAKY
Vandalism that is harder to spot, or that otherwise circumvents detection, including adding plausible misinformation to articles (such as minor alteration of facts or additions of plausible-sounding hoaxes), hiding vandalism (such as by making two bad edits and reverting only one), simultaneously using
multiple accounts
or IP addresses to vandalize, abuse of maintenance and deletion templates, or reverting legitimate edits with the intent of hindering the improvement of pages. Impersonating other users by signing an edit with a different username or IP address also constitutes sneaky vandalism, but take care not to confuse this with appropriately correcting an unsigned edit made by another user. Some vandals even follow their vandalism with an edit that states "Rv vandalism" or similar in the
edit summary
in order to give the appearance the vandalism was reverted.
Spam external linking
සංස්කරණය
Adding or continuing to add spam external links is vandalism if the activity continues after a warning. A spam external link is one added to a page mainly for the purpose of promoting a website, product or a user's interests rather than to improve the page editorially.
Talk page vandalism
සංස්කරණය
කෙටි මග
WP:TPV
Illegitimately removing or editing other users' comments, especially in closed discussions, or adding offensive comments. However, it is acceptable to blank comments constituting vandalism,
internal spam
, or
harassment
or a
personal attack
. It is also acceptable to identify an unsigned comment. Users are also
permitted
to remove comments from their own user talk pages. A policy of prohibiting users from removing warnings from their own talk pages was
considered and rejected
on the grounds that it would create more issues than it would solve.
Template vandalism
සංස්කරණය
Modifying the wiki language or text of a
template
in a harmful or disruptive manner. This is especially serious, because it will negatively impact the appearance of multiple pages. Some templates appear on hundreds or thousands of pages, so they are
permanently protected from editing
to prevent vandalism.
User and user talk page vandalism
සංස්කරණය
Unwelcome, illegitimate edits to another person's user page may be considered vandalism. User pages are regarded as within the control of their respective users and generally should not be edited without the permission of the user to whom they belong. See
WP:UP#OWN
. This is why there is an
edit filter that prevents new and non-(auto)confirmed users from editing user pages other than their own
. Related to this is
Wikipedia:No personal attacks
Vandalbots
සංස්කරණය
script or "robot"
that attempts to vandalize or add spam to a mass of pages.
What is
not
vandalism
සංස්කරණය
කෙටි මං
WP:VANDNOT
WP:NOTVAND
WP:NOTV
WP:NOTVANDALISM
WP:NOTVAN
Although at times the following situations may be referred to colloquially as "vandalism", they are not usually considered vandalism within the context of Wikipedia. However, each case should be treated independently, taking into consideration whether or not the actions violate Wikipedia policies and guidelines. If an editor treats situations which are not clearly vandalism as such, it may harm the encyclopedia by alienating or driving away potential editors.
Boldly editing
සංස්කරණය
Bold edits, though they may precede consensus or be inconsistent with prior consensus, are not vandalism unless other aspects of the edits identify them as vandalism. The Wikipedia community encourages users to be bold and acknowledges
the role of bold edits in reaching consensus
Copyright policy violations
සංස්කරණය
Uploading or using material on Wikipedia in violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies is prohibited, but is not vandalism unless the user does so maliciously or fails to heed warnings. It is at least as serious an issue as vandalism and persistent offenders will ultimately get blocked, but it is well worth spending time communicating clearly with those who violate copyright as they are far more likely to reform than vandals or spammers.
Disruptive editing
or stubbornness
සංස්කරණය
Some users cannot come to an agreement with others who are willing to talk to them about an editing issue, and repeatedly make changes against consensus.
Edit warring
is not vandalism and should not be dealt with as such.
Dispute resolution
may help. See also:
Tendentious editing
Starting a
deletion process
in bad faith is disruptive editing, but is not vandalism. However, misusing deletion template messages
with no intention
to start a deletion process is vandalism by
abuse of tags
In short, all vandalism is disruptive editing, but not all disruptive editing is vandalism.
Edit summary
omission
සංස්කරණය
The
edit summary
is important in that it helps other editors understand the purpose of your edit. Though its use is not required, it is strongly recommended, even for minor edits, and is considered proper
Wikipedia etiquette
. Even a brief edit summary is better than none. However, not leaving edit summaries is not considered vandalism.
Editing tests by experimenting users
සංස්කරණය
Users sometimes edit pages as an experiment. Such edits, while prohibited, are treated differently from vandalism. These users should be warned using the uw-test series of
user warning templates
, or by a talk page message including, if appropriate, a welcome and referral to the
Wikipedia sandbox
, where they can continue to make test edits without being unintentionally disruptive. Registered users can also create their own sandboxes as a
user subpage
. If a user has made a test edit and then reverted it, consider placing the message {{
uw-selfrevert
}}, on their talk page. Pages created as test edits outside of userspace may be deleted under
speedy deletion criterion G2
. Editing tests are considered vandalism only when a user continues to make test edits despite receiving numerous warnings.
Harassment
or
personal attacks
සංස්කරණය
Personal attacks and harassment are not allowed. While some harassment is also vandalism, such as user page vandalism, or inserting a personal attack into an article, harassment in itself is not vandalism and should be handled differently.
Incorrect
wiki markup
and
style
සංස්කරණය
Inexperienced users are often unfamiliar with Wikipedia's formatting and grammatical standards, such as how to create internal and/or external links or which words should be bolded or italicized, etc. Rather than label such users as vandals, just explain to them what the standard style would be for the issue at hand, perhaps pointing them towards the documentation at
How to edit a page
, and the like.
Lack of understanding of the purpose of Wikipedia
සංස්කරණය
Some users are not familiar with
Wikipedia's purpose
or policies and may start editing it as if it were a different medium—such as a forum or blog—in a way that it
appears as unproductive editing
or borderline vandalism to experienced users. Although such edits can usually be reverted, it should not be treated as vandalism.
Misinformation, accidental
සංස්කරණය
A user who, in good faith, adds content to an article that is factually inaccurate in the belief that it is accurate, is trying to contribute to and improve Wikipedia, not vandalize it. If you believe inaccurate information has been added to an article in good faith, remove it once you are certain it is inaccurate, and consider discussing its factuality with the user who has added it.
NPOV contraventions
සංස්කරණය
The neutral point of view policy is difficult for many of us to understand. Even Wikipedia veterans occasionally introduce material which is not ideal from an
NPOV
perspective. Indeed, we are all affected to a greater extent than we estimate by our beliefs. Though the material added may be inappropriate, it is not vandalism in itself.
Nonsense, accidental
සංස්කරණය
While intentionally adding nonsense to a page is a form of vandalism, sometimes honest editors may not have expressed themselves correctly (e.g. there may be an error in the
syntax
, particularly for Wikipedians who use
English as a second language
). Also, connection errors, browser extensions, or
edit conflicts
can unintentionally produce the appearance of nonsense or malicious edits. In either case,
assume good faith
Policy and guideline pages, good faith changes to
සංස්කරණය
Editors are encouraged to
be bold
. However, making edits to
Wikipedia policies and guidelines
pages, such as this one, does require some knowledge of the
consensus
on the issues. If people misjudge consensus, it would not be considered vandalism; rather, it would be an opportunity to discuss the matter with them, and help them understand the consensus.
Reversion or removal of unencyclopedic material
සංස්කරණය
Even
factually correct
material may not belong on Wikipedia, and removing such content when it is inconsistent with
Wikipedia's content policies
is not vandalism.
Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion, per
Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons
Make sure that the removed content is consistent with Wikipedia's standards before restoring it or treating its removal as vandalism.
How to spot vandalism
සංස්කරණය
කෙටි මං
WP:HTSV
WP:SPOTVAN
Useful ways to detect vandalism include:
Recent changes patrolling
, using the
recent changes
link with filters to spot suspicious edits
Keeping an eye on your
watchlist
The
edit history
of an article can be checked for recent suspicious edits. Article size, as given in bytes, usually increases slightly with time, so a sudden large decrease may indicate a
section blanking
. Similarly, if an article's size change is inappropriately large for the stated edit summary (e.g. "Fixing typo" while removing 100 bytes), it is an indication of vandalism.
Even in Rome itself, the City of the Popes, the vandalism of the ignorant wrought dreadful havoc.
Rev.
James MacCaffrey
History of the Catholic Church From the Renaissance to the
French Revolution
In all the three methods above, examples of suspicious edits are those performed by IP addresses,
red linked
, or obviously improvised usernames. A good way to start is to click on every edit in watchlists, histories etc. with the least suspicion of being vandalism. Increased experience will probably give a sense of which edit descriptions are worth to check further and which may likely be ignored. Some descriptions like "Fixed typo" may be vandalism as that is one of the default edit summaries. IP editors should not be approached with the assumption that they are vandals. Although many vandals do vandalize without registering an account, there are many IP editors who are
great contributors to Wikipedia
. Always read the actual changes made and judge on that, rather than who made the changes or what was entered in the
edit summary
See the
what links here
pages for
Insert text
Link title
Headline text
Bold text
and
Example Image
to detect test edits. (See also {{
toolbar experiments
}}).
The
auto-summary feature
can also help users spot vandalism.
Viewing the
abuse log
or this version
[1]
if the regular abuse log is cluttered by spambots.
Watching for edits
tagged
by the abuse filter. However, many tagged edits are legitimate, so they should not be blindly reverted. That is, do not revert without at least reading the edit.
Plausible, subtle changes not supported by sources or by text elsewhere in the article, particularly without an edit summary, may suggest vandalism. Changing numbers, sometimes by 1, is a common stealth tactic.
How to respond to vandalism
සංස්කරණය
කෙටි මග
WP:RVAN
Upon discovering vandalism,
revert
such edits, using the undo function or an
anti-vandalism tool
. Once the vandalism is undone,
warn
the vandalizing editor. Notify
administrators
at the
vandalism noticeboard
of editors who continue to vandalize after multiple warnings, and administrators should intervene to preserve content and prevent further disruption by
blocking
such editors. Users whose
main or sole purpose is clearly vandalism
may be blocked indefinitely without warning.
If you see vandalism on a list of changes (such as your
watchlist
), then revert it immediately. You may use the "undo" button (and the automatic edit summary it generates), and mark the change as minor. It may be helpful to check the
page history
to determine whether other recent edits by the same or other editors also represent vandalism. Repair all vandalism you can identify.
For a new article, if all versions of the article are pure vandalism, mark it for
speedy deletion
by tagging it with
{{
Db-g3
}}
To make vandalism reverts easier you can ask for the
rollback feature
to be enabled for your registered Wikipedia account. This feature is only for reverting vandalism and other obvious disruption, and lets you revert several recent edits with a single click. See
Wikipedia:Requests for permissions
If you see that a user has added vandalism you may also check their
other contributions
. If most or all of these are obvious vandalism you may report the user immediately at the
Administrator intervention against vandalism noticeboard
, though even in this case you may consider issuing a
warning message
first, unless there is an urgent need to
block
the user. Otherwise, you can leave an appropriate warning on the user's
talk page
. Remember that any editor may freely remove messages from their own talk page, so they might appear only in the talk history. If a user continues to cause disruption after being warned, report them also at the Administrator intervention against vandalism noticeboard. An
administrator
will then decide whether to block the user.
For repeated vandalism by an
IP user
it is helpful to trace the IP address (e.g.
) and add
{{
whois
Name of owner
}}
to the user talk page of the address. If it appears to be a
shared IP address
, add
{{
SharedIP
Name of owner
}}
or
{{
Shared IP edu
Name of owner
}}
. The
OrgName
on the IP trace result should be used as the
Name of owner
parameter in the above three templates.
Undetected vandalism
සංස්කරණය
Sometimes vandalism takes place on top of older, undetected vandalism. With undetected vandalism, editors may make edits without realizing the vandalism occurred. This can make it harder to detect and delete the vandalism, which is now hidden among other edits. Sometimes
bots
try to fix collateral damage and accidentally make things worse. Check the
page history
to make sure you're
reverting
to a "clean" version of the page. Alternatively, if you can't tell where the best place is, take your best guess and leave a note on the article's
talk page
so that someone more familiar with the page can address the issue—or you can manually remove the vandalism without reverting it.
For beginners
සංස්කරණය
මේවාත් බලන්න:
Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism
For relatively inexperienced Wikipedians, use these simple steps to quickly respond to what you consider vandalism. This is essentially an abridged version of the above page.
Assess
whether the edit was made in good or bad faith. If in good faith, it is
not
vandalism as such, so question the accuracy of information on the talk page or add an
inline cleanup tag
, such as a "{{
dubious
}}" tag, to the disputed edit. If it is in bad faith, then it
is
vandalism and you may take the appropriate steps to remove it.
Revert
the vandalism by viewing the page's history and selecting the most recent version of the page prior to the vandalism. Use an edit summary such as 'rv/v' or 'reverted vandalism' and click on 'Publish changes'.
Warn
the vandal. Access the vandal's talk page and warn them. A simple note explaining the problem with their editing is sufficient. If desired, a
series of warning templates
exist to simplify the process of warning users, but
these templates are not required
. These templates include
Level one: {{
subst
uw-vandalism1
}} This is a gentle caution regarding unconstructive edits; it encourages new editors to use a sandbox for test edits. This is the mildest warning.
Level two: {{
subst
uw-vandalism2
}} This warning is also fairly mild, though it explicitly uses the word 'vandalism' and links to this Wikipedia policy. It is the first to warn that further disruptive editing or vandalism may lead to a block, however it uses the wording "loss of editing privileges" rather than "block".
Level three: {{
subst
uw-vandalism3
}} This warning is sterner. It is the first to warn that further disruptive editing or vandalism may lead to a block while actually using the word "block".
Level four: {{
subst
uw-vandalism4
}} This is the sharpest vandalism warning template, and indicates that any further disruptive editing may lead to a block without warning.
Level four-im: {{
subst
uw-vandalism4im
}} This warning template should be used only in the worst conditions of vandalism. It indicates that this is the only warning the target will receive, and that further disruptive edits will result in a block without warning.
Watch
for future vandalism from the vandal by checking the user's contributions. If bad faith edits continue, revert them and warn them again, letting the users know that they can be blocked. Note that it is
not
necessary to use all four warning templates in succession, nor is it necessary to incrementally step through warnings.
Report
vandals that continue their behavior after being warned to
Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism
. While not strictly required, administrators there are most likely to respond rapidly to requests which include at least two warnings, culminating in the level-four "last chance" template.
Template and CSS vandalism
සංස්කරණය
If no vandalizing edits appear in the page's edit history, or the vandalism obscures the page tabs so you can't easily access the history or edit the page, it is probably
template
or
Cascading Style Sheets
vandalism. These are often not difficult to fix, but can be confusing.
To access the page history or edit the page when the "View history" or "Edit" tabs are inaccessible, use
Wikipedia keyboard shortcuts
. You can also access the history through a
vandalism patrolling tool
if you're using one, or from your
watchlist
if you are
watching the page
), or from your
user contributions
if you have edited the page. Or, enter the
URL
manually into the
address bar
of your browser: it will take the form
Name_of_article
?action=edit
or
Name_of_article
?action=history
If vandalizing edits do not appear in the page history, the vandalism is likely in a
transcluded
template instead of the page itself. To find the template page, edit the article (using
Wikipedia keyboard shortcuts
if necessary); toward the bottom of the edit page is a list of all templates transcluded into the page. Look for vandalism in the transcluded templates not
protected
. Alternatively, look for
{{
Template name
}}
or
{{
Template name
parameter
...
}}
in the text, approximately where the vandalism appears, then go to the page Template:
Template name
and revert any vandalism. When you return to the original page, the vandalism should be gone, though you may need to
purge
the page.
Image vandalism
සංස්කරණය
Images
are occasionally used for vandalism, such as by placing shock or explicit images where they should not be. When an image has been created exclusively for vandalism, it can be requested for speedy deletion: under criterion
G3
if hosted on Wikipedia or as
vandalism
if hosted on
Commons
(a file repository for
Wikimedia Foundation
projects). When an image is used for vandalism due to its explicit nature but has legitimate encyclopedic uses (Wikipedia
is not censored
) or is hosted on Commons and has legitimate uses on other projects, it can be requested for being added to the
bad image list
, which precludes its addition on any page except those specified.
How not to respond to vandalism
සංස්කරණය
කෙටි මග
WP:NORESVAND
Do not nominate a page for
deletion
because it is being vandalized. If a page is persistently vandalized, consider requesting
protection
of the page at
Wikipedia:Requests for page protection
Do not feed the trolls
. Fanning the fire will only serve to make the situation worse. Similarly,
do not insult the vandals
. If someone is doing something they know is wrong, insulting them over it is likely to make them vandalize more, just to get that reaction. Furthermore,
Wikipedia is not the place for personal attacks
, it is
not a battleground
, and
two wrongs don't make a right
. Instead, report them to the
administrators
if they continue.
Avoid the word "vandal"
. In particular, this word should not be used to refer to any contributor in good standing nor to any
edits that might have been made in good faith
. This is because if the edits were made in good faith, they are
not vandalism
. Assume good faith yourself; instead of calling the person who made the edits a "vandal", discuss your concerns with them. Comment on the content and substance of the edits, instead of making
personal attacks
Warnings
සංස්කරණය
Warning templates
PageName is optional
{{
subst
uw-vandalism1
PageName
}}
~~~~
(unintentional vandalism/test)
{{
subst
uw-delete1
PageName
}}
~~~~
(unintentional removal of content)
{{
subst
uw-vandalism2
PageName
}}
~~~~
(suitable for intentional nonsense or disruption)
{{
subst
uw-delete2
PageName
}}
~~~~
(variant for removal of content)
{{
subst
uw-vandalism3
PageName
}}
~~~~
("please stop" for use after level 2 warning)
{{
subst
uw-delete3
PageName
}}
~~~~
(please stop removing content)
{{
subst
uw-vandalism4
PageName
}}
~~~~
(last warning for vandalism)
{{
subst
uw-delete4
PageName
}}
~~~~
(last warning for removing content)
{{
subst
uw-vandalism4im
PageName
}}
~~~~
(only warning; for severe or grotesque vandalism only)
{{
subst
uw-delete4im
PageName
}}
~~~~
(only warning; for many blankings in a short period of time)
See additional templates and examples of output
කෙටි මග
WP:WARNVAND
The purpose of warning a user who has vandalized is to inform the user that the user's conduct is abusive and prohibited, and seek the user's compliance. Not all that appears to be vandalism is in bad faith, and a warning can politely advise and correct users unaware of the nature of their actions. A warning may even dissuade a user acting in bad faith from continuing, particularly as the warnings escalate and the user is informed of the consequences of continuing.
Warning a user for vandalism is generally a prerequisite to administrator intervention. Because of this, users should be warned for each and every instance of vandalism.
How to warn vandalizing users
සංස්කරණය
A list of user warning templates, with descriptions and instructions for their use, is at
Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace
. In addition to a series of user warning templates for vandalism, there are series for specific types of vandalism. Use the most specific user warning template for the conduct. The existence of these templates is intended as a convenience, and
their use is not required
. A specifically tailored note, written personally and directly addressing the problematic behavior is equally as acceptable as a form of warning, and in many cases, will often result in better engagement with the user in question.
Assume good faith
(such as that the user is simply unaware of the policies and guidelines) unless it is clear that the user is deliberately harming Wikipedia from the outset, for instance in cases of abusive, vulgar, or juvenile vandalism.
If you do choose to use warning templates, please choose templates that are appropriate to the type and level of problem in question. If edits are questionable, but not clearly vandalism, consider using lower-level templates (level 1 or 2) and wait for a few further contributions to see if the other editor responds or changes their behavior. If the behavior continues, or if it is clear the edits are in bad faith from the outset, the use of a higher-level template (level 3 or 4) may be appropriate. If, after receiving multiple warnings, the behavior persists past the point where good faith can be extended, or it becomes clear that the user has
had
the opportunity to notice they have been warned, and they
still
persist with the problematic behavior, consider reporting them to
the Vandalism noticeboard
Administrator response to vandalism
සංස්කරණය
Response from administrators at the vandalism noticeboard varies depending on the type of vandalism and the specifics of the report. Keep in mind:
Admins are unlikely to block a user who has not been warned at all, or who has been warned, but has stopped editing since being warned. It must be clear that the user has been told to stop vandalizing, and still persists despite such warnings, except for egregious cases.
Reports of vandalism from registered accounts are handled differently than that from IP users, and reports from newly registered accounts are handled differently from accounts of experienced Wikipedia users.
IP addresses may or may not be kept by the same person for long periods of time; a dynamic address which appears to have stopped vandalizing will probably not be blocked, while one that
is
actively vandalizing will likely receive a short (1–2 day) block. If there is evidence that an IP address is being used by the same person over a long period of time to repeatedly vandalize Wikipedia, or if it is clear the IP address is being used by multiple people to vandalize Wikipedia (such as a school-based IP, which can sometimes attract lots of juvenile vandalism over long periods of time from many different people) then an administrator may block the IP for a longer time period (several months to a year). IP addresses are almost never blocked indefinitely.
Brand-new accounts who repeatedly vandalize despite multiple warnings are usually blocked indefinitely, especially when there is no history of quality editing on the account.
Reports which involve experienced Wikipedia users rarely result in blocks for vandalism, as these reports are usually mislabeling other problematic behavior (such as misrepresenting sources, or removing text, or edit warring) as vandalism. The vandalism noticeboard is not designed to litigate disputes or to investigate complex behavior problems. Instead, other noticeboards such as
the edit warring noticeboard
or
the incidents noticeboard
are more appropriate to deal with those issues.
Check back in to the vandalism noticeboard to see how your report has been dealt with. If an administrator declines to block someone you report, they will always leave a note explaining why they did not respond as you requested. Often, this does not mean the person you reported is behaving properly, or should not be dealt with, but merely that the
mechanisms
of the vandalism noticeboard are not well suited for handling many types of reports. Consider taking the issue up at a more appropriate noticeboard, which has been tailored to the specific type of problem you are seeing. Other times, a report is declined for being stale (blocks to abandoned accounts, or to IP addresses which have been dormant for some time are rarely done), or to the admin being unable to easily identify the edits as vandalism.
If the vandalism in question is "sneaky vandalism", is being committed by a person who was
blocked under a prior account or IP address
, or requires in-depth and direct knowledge of a prior problem, consider taking the report to
the incidents noticeboard
instead. There are hundreds of Wikipedia administrators, and many of them are unfamiliar with the intricacies of past cases. Unless it is the sort of vandalism that needs no explanation at all, it should be taken elsewhere and not
WP:AIV
Reminding responding users to correctly warn
සංස්කරණය
Because warnings for vandalism are generally a prerequisite to administrator intervention, it is important that users responding to vandalism warn vandalizing users. To inform responding users of this responsibility, use the user warning template {{
uw-warn
}}.
Likewise, incorrect use of user warning templates, even if well-intended, should be identified to the mistaken user. The {{
uw-tempabuse
}} series of user warning templates may be used, but a detailed talk page message is better.
Tracing IP addresses
සංස්කරණය
කෙටි මං
WP:WHOIS
WP:TRACEIP
The owners of
IP addresses
can be found using:
ARIN
(North America)
RIPE NCC
(Europe, the Middle East and Central Asia)
APNIC
(Asia Pacific)
LACNIC
(Latin American and Caribbean)
AfriNIC
(Africa)
IPLigence
ipaddress.com
Find-IP-address.org
who.is
If an address is not in one registry, it will probably be in another.
Identifying associated IP addresses
සංස්කරණය
If you're trying to determine whether a
set
of IP addresses involved in vandalism is related, a command-line WHOIS query will generally list this information, or can be shown using the
Routeviews
DNS
name server
asn.routeviews.org reverse
IP
look-up to find the
CIDR
and
ASN
for a set of IP addresses. This can be done using
IP lookup tools
WHOIS query
will typically return NetRange, CIDR, NetName, NetHandle, and OriginAS, all of which identify specific network spaces. Data and labeling vary considerably by WHOIS registrar.
The Routeviews data is far more uniformly structured and returns ASN and CIDR as a reverse-lookup TXT query result. It is more useful and faster than WHOIS when checking multiple IP addresses and can be scripted or automated.
CIDR identifies a set of related addresses ("network space") and ASN identifies an
Autonomous System
—that is, a single administrative entity with control over multiple (and often very many) addresses. Some (though not all) abuse from multiple sources does come from such unified spaces—possibly corresponding to a set of hosts within a single facility.
Abuse originating in a short period of time from different IP addresses within the same CIDR or ASN may indicate a dedicated non-distributed attack, as opposed to a
distributed denial of service attack
Proxies, VPNs and Tor exit nodes
සංස්කරණය
It's possible that a user's source location is being masked by routing traffic through a
Proxy server
VPN
or the
Tor network
. Such addresses typically serve many, not just one, person, and though they can be valid present challenges when used for abuse.
A proxy VPN is not necessarily detectable, but commercial services may be indicated by the hostname when resolving an IP address.
Users of the Tor anonymity network will show the IP address of a Tor "exit node". Lists of known Tor exit nodes are available from the Tor Project's
Tor Bulk Exit List exporting tool
See also
සංස්කරණය
This page is referenced from the
Wikipedia:Glossary
Vandalism on Wikipedia
Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-06-22/Vandalism
User:ClueBot NG
– A bot specifically designed for fixing vandalism.
Tools
සංස්කරණය
මේවාත් බලන්න:
Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism/Tools
AntiVandal
– Web-based counter-vandalism tool. (requires
rollback
permission).
Huggle
– Cross-platform application for dealing with vandalism (requires
rollback
permission).
Igloo
– JavaScript-based browser window for reverting vandalism. (requires
rollback
permission).
mobileUndo
is a
userscript
which allows you to revert vandalism on mobile.
STiki
– Cross-platform and Java-based anti-vandalism application. Connects to a remote, non-Wikimedia server. (requires
rollback
permission).
Twinkle
– JavaScript gadget allowing reversion of vandalism from page
diffs
Ultraviolet
– User-friendly Javascript-based diff browser and counter-vandalism tool (works with or without
rollback
permissions).
Guidelines
සංස්කරණය
Administrator intervention against vandalism
– intended to get administrator attention for obvious and persistent vandals and spammers
Cleaning up vandalism
– introduction to cleaning up vandalism
Criteria for speedy deletion
– English Wikipedia policy
Do not create hoaxes
– content guideline
Most vandalized pages
– articles that have undergone repeated vandalism - This page is inactive
Recent changes patrol
– Wikipedia communal patrol
Requests for page protection
– for protection against long-term attacks
Template messages/User talk namespace
– grid of templates for user talk page warnings and notices
Vandalism-only accounts
– advice for dealing with vandalism from registered accounts
WikiProject user warnings
– internal project for creating a complete, standardised set of user warning templates
WikiProject Vandalism studies
– internal project for conducting research related to unconstructive edits on Wikipedia (currently semi-active)
Essays
සංස්කරණය
Avoid the word "vandal"
– essay on the differences between vandals and those who make adverse edits
Deny recognition
– essay on not feeding the trolls
Do not insult the vandals
– essay on vandals and civility
Don't be trigger happy
– essay on care, courtesy, and professionalism when performing recent changes and new pages patrols
Don't call a spade a spade
– essay on civility and difficult editors
Don't template the regulars
– essay on how to use warning templates carefully
Identifying test edits
– essay on the difference between editing tests and vandalism
IP address editors are human too
– essay on assuming IP address editors are able and willing to make positive contributions
Make protection requests sparingly
– essay recommending not overusing page protection
Not every IP is a vandal
– essay on the common assumption that IP address editors are vandals
On assuming good faith
– essay on the relationship between the Vandalism policy and the
Assume good faith
behavioral guideline
The motivation of a vandal
– essay on "Why would anyone wish to vandalize a source of information that benefits people?"
Vandalism is pointless
– essay on why vandalism will get you nowhere
Vandals versus Trolls
– essay on the distinction between vandals and trolls
User:Ritchie333/Plain and simple guide to vandalism
– one
administrator
's view
Meta
සංස්කරණය
m:Anti-vandalism ideas
m:Vandalbot
m:What is a troll?
m:Small Wiki Monitoring Team
– cross-wiki anti-vandalism
Further reading
සංස්කරණය
Statistics about reverts by bots, Huggle, Twinkle
in wmcharts (inactive since 2019)
"How I Used Lies About a Cartoon to Prove History is Meaningless on the Internet"
. 15 June 2020.
ප්‍රධාන විකිපීඩියා ප්‍රතිපත්ති සහ මාර්ගෝපදේශන
සමාලෝචනය
පංච කුලුනු
ප්‍රතිපත්ති සහ මාර්ගෝපදේශන
ප්‍රතිපත්ති සහ මාර්ගෝපදේශන ලැයිස්තුව
ප්‍රතිපත්ති ලැයිස්තුව
මාර්ගෝපදේශන ලැයිස්තුව
ව්‍යාපෘති-ව්‍යාප්ත ප්‍රතිපත්ති
විකිපීඩියාව කුමක් නොවන්නේද
සංස්කරණ ප්‍රතිපත්තිය
සම්මුතිය
ගැටුම් නිරාකරණය
සියළු නීති නොසලකන්න
අරටු අන්තර්ග ප්‍රතිපත්ති
මධ්‍යස්ථ දෘෂ්ඨිය
No original research
සත්‍යෝක්ෂ්‍යතාව
අන්තර්ගතයන් පිළිබඳ වෙනත් ප්‍රතිපත්ති
ලිපි මාතෘකා
සජීවී පුද්ගල චරිතාපදාන
මකා දැමීමේ ප්‍රතිපත්තිය
අන්තර්ගත මාර්ගෝපදේශන
Citing sources
බහුරුත්හරණය
Do not create hoaxes
Do not include copies of primary sources
Identifying reliable sources
Notability
Map conventions
Patent nonsense
හැසිරීම් පිළිබඳ ප්‍රතිපත්ති
Child protection
ආචාරශීලීභාවය
Edit warring
හිරිහැරකිරීම
No legal threats
No personal attacks
Ownership of articles
Sock puppetry
හැසිරීම් පිළිබඳ මාර්ගෝපදේශන
Assume good faith
Conflict of interest
Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point
Etiquette
Gaming the system
Please do not bite the newcomers
සංස්කරණ මාර්ගෝපදේශන
ලිපියෙහි තරම
නිර්භීත වන්න
ශිරස්කසටහන්
අත්සන්
සාකච්ඡා පිටු මාර්ගෝපදේශන
Subpages
User pages
WikiProjects
විලාශ සම්මුති
Manual of Style
Dates and numbers
Layout
Lead section
Lists
Linking
වර්ගීකරණ මාර්ගෝපදේශන
Categories, lists, and navigation templates
Categorization
Template namespace
විකිමීඩියා පදනම
Licensing and copyright
ප්‍රතිපත්ති ලැයිස්තුව
ප්‍රතිපත්ති
මාර්ගෝපදේශන
" වෙතින් සම්ප්‍රවේශනය කෙරිණි
ප්‍රවර්ග
විකිපීඩියා ප්‍රතිපත්ති
Wikipedia glossary items
Wikipedia vandalism
Wikipedia conduct policies
Wikipedia how-to
සැඟවුණු ප්‍රවර්ග:
විකිපීඩියාවෙහි වැරදි ආරක්‍ෂිත සැකිලි අඩංගු පිටු
පළමු පරාමිතිය සකස් කල යුතු විකිපීඩියා කෙටි මග කොටුව
විකිපීඩියා
විනාශකිරීම
මාතෘකාවක් එක්කරන්න