Sigh. I am frustrated with this vandalism.
If there is an article or a whole topic that is mostly maintained by a small group of experts, I find it acceptable to put a notice at the top with:
"hey, the people maintaining this topic will no longer update the articles on this wiki but you can find our future efforts over here now"

But this blanket redirect insertion is just disrespectful.

In reply to @fadenb:utzutzutz.net
:/
I'll take proper care of this tomorrow. Currently traveling

In reply to @hellerbarde:fairydust.space
How so? That seems like a lot. But then again, I dont know the law in Germany.

303a StGB should you want to read up on German criminal law ;)

Already got it confirmed by phone as applicable, need to walk over and bring them the evidence (I fear they will print it all instead of doing it digitally)

In reply to @fadenb:utzutzutz.net
Rollback script finished just now.
Will need to check if it took care of all changes or if manual afterwork is required (e.g., if normal edits came afterwards)

In reply to @0x4a6f:matrix.org
There it has begun: https://nixos.wiki/index.php?title=Julia&oldid=11521

In reply to @hellerbarde:fairydust.space
What timing. If this is gonna be an automated edit war, that I would consider harassment and worthy of turning towards the authorities.

In reply to @hellerbarde:fairydust.space
Appreciate the reference but nah, I'm not interested.
Also, from a personal perspective, I think the law everywhere is woefully stupid for web things. In my opinion, the mere fact that it can be applied doesn't make it a morally good thing to engage the law. But that is totally subjective and your decision.

It is okay if we differ on this. Part of life ;)

If it was someone with the intention of being helpful but "misguided" I'd deal with it differently.
Where I draw the line is that this person knowingly did something they expected to be not ok. The person was called out by other people on discourse already

I did a search and could not find any CURRENT page with the message still on it (at least not with a link).

Note for later: The '--bot' parameter of the maintenance script does not actually tag the mass edits as bot 🤷‍♂️

In reply to @eyjhb:eyjhb.dk
Wasn't that just a edit that didn't get rolled back?

In reply to @fadenb:utzutzutz.net
And in the admin channel I just started a thread on whether we will, at least for a while, simply block linking to wiki.nixos.org. I feel this is a a bit to strong and cross linking between resources would be hindered which is for sure not the goal.

I understand this intention. And it is your prerogative on your page.

But just like I will argue with people in the other channel if they propose blocking links to your wiki (though for a different reason...), I would love it if we could find a different solution to prevent this type of vandalism on your wiki.

In reply to @fadenb:utzutzutz.net
Ack. I would not want to do that longterm for any website that is not clearly malicious. More as a hotfix while it is properly handled

In reply to @crunch:kde.org
does this mean accessing the wiki through mullvad is gonna be banned again :/

Unrelated to this, but yes.

We still see weekly attack (attempts) via Mullvad.
Mullvad claims to be unable to prevent this -> before it is broken for all users we are happy to not have mullvad users but still be able to serve the rest.

In reply to @crunch:kde.org
yeah the way mullvad works i doubt they'd be able to do anything