Way History: Дворец детского спорта (37786979) | OpenStreetMap is fixed (unless name=Дворец детского спорта is a slur? Google translate gives “Children’s Sports Palace”).
Park name was clearly vandalised: but only in tile cache and went away after clearing browser cache ( Browser cache - OpenStreetMap Wiki )
Vandalism started on 2023-08-20T20:28:32Z.
Can I fix it myself somehow ?
@JaM_IL: that vandalism at this bridge had been reverted already. At the moment the data has the right name again (see history of all the vandalism and reverts here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1790163/history ). But as this is a relation and relation changes may not trigger a rerendering, it sometimes takes some time to see the clean state again on all zoom levels on the map.
I had the same problem with yesterdays data (fetching the daily diff) but todays daily diff looks much better as NorthCrab, mappinglander, romanvr, luisforte, the DWG and many others did a great job in reverting all those vandalism. Todays daily diff is not 100% vandalism free, e.g. this one was catched in the last hour: Way History: Белая улица (1201755140) | OpenStreetMap but I don’t see the mass problems as they occurred in yesterdays daily diff. I don’t know about the current weekly planet file though as that one should have ~ mondays state of data…
Can you at least reveal any plans?
Now the vandalism has started again and accounts are not blocked yet.
In almost a week we still don’t have a tool to ban these accounts automatically?
We haven’t been able to restrict registrations for a week now?
Vandalised edits have already infiltrated not only the tiles, but also Nominatim and routers. This already discourages many people from using and editing OSM.
upd: It might be worth having the discussion here How about limit new accounts? - #115 by TrickyFoxy
That is the key issue, I think. Blocking users after they have registered is always going to miss some destructive edits. If we can identify problem signups as they occur (and although I’m not party to that data, from what I’ve heard, that is the case here) then it massively slows down the ability of a vandal to vandalise.
Right now the vandalism bots are firing again. No fun.
Esp. not for DWG. Would be lovely to have a “no new signups for 12hours” function for the DWG.
Here are some of those vandals works:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/PuYyY/history#map=6/57.030/37.185
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/PreexPeGtZAalrganzs/history#map=6/57.710/37.397
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/FREErMMeEMer/history#map=5/54.538/36.726
and some more accounts I already reported.
You may not revert edits until accounts are blocked 
As long as the accounts are not blocked, it is better not to deal with reverts.
Has anyone contacted Wikipedia or the like to see what their experiences of concentrated vandalism have been?
Ok. Have reported a lot of those. Will wait with further reverts.
Wikipedia has a good track record of dealing with vandalism and you can draw ideas from there. But
Some more of those vandalism bots (list deleted)
Edit: all blocked by the relentless working DWG team, Thank you.
Actually, I probably wouldn’t report them all in “oneboxes” here, as it just makes the forum difficult to read - email the DWG or report the accounts in the usual way. There tend to be lots of these at once (I’ve just blocked 150)… Clearly the solution isn’t playing “whack-a-mole” after the event, though, as I said above.
I think I’ve got all of the current wave (blocks, not reverts) - if any are still unblocked please do let us know.
Yes, I just tried to list them somewhere but started to refrain from discourse when I saw discourse using those boxes here for a plain list of links (it will need ages before I get to be friends with discourse…). But I saw you asking for a link elsewhere thats why I listed them here. And next time I will probably just use one mail with a list instead of using the “report user” function each time (I just hoped that the report user function would result in you having a “block user” function.) But I’m not sure what is easier to handle for the DWG.
I’m actually blocking users based on (a) identifying the way that users are editing and (b) user reports and emails to the DWG.
(a) is actually surprisingly effective, but (b) is also useful because it allows to work through a list and make sure none have been missed.
???
you definitely can do this (though with automated vandalism it may be not very effective, still it is not case of “You may not revert edits”)
Most likely my translation is confusing you. My point was that as long as accounts are not blocked, it’s best not to engage in reverts. Clarified that.
I was reading this in English.
Especially if account is just throwaway one and stopped editing reverting damage is 100% fine.
Could we just simply put a strong CAPTCHA on the sign up page? Or at least introduce a several hour time delay between registering and when editing is enabled so we have time to spot suspicious accounts before they start the scripted edits?