UDWiki:Administration/Protections/2009/May

From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Protections Archive

2005 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2006 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2008 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2009 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2011 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2012 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Q3 Q4
2013 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Years 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019



Suggestion:20090513_Suicide_With_A_Vengeance

SA's vote (number 6) requires striking according to the rules of suggestions voting. As a consequence of this, votes by DDR (number 7) and OrangeGaf (number 14) also require striking, as they deem their votes to be "As SA" they are also providing no justification. As the deadline has passed these votes cannot be changed or added to by the voters under suggestions precedent and common sense. The suggestion will remain Peer Rejected, no other changes will be required. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:36, 28 May 2009 (BST)

Oh no, see, due to your and quite a few others reasoning, any thing wrote after the initial vote is considered a justification. Theirs cannot be struck just because of it being "as SA", because no one cares what kind of justification things get, as long as it gets one. Cause you know, making your justification "Shoes for the poor" is more valid than "Kill".--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 02:52, 28 May 2009 (BST)
I think you'll find that such justifications are considered trolling and/or inane and also removed. Either you're ignorant of the suggestion system and its precedents or you are deliberately disrupting various pages for your own amusement. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:54, 28 May 2009 (BST)
If I was, I have the best examples to follow around here.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 12:25, 28 May 2009 (BST)

The vote has been restruck by SA -- boxy talkteh rulz 23:00 28 May 2009 (BST)

One has been struck, the other two haven't. As they have no reasoning they are also invalid and should be struck. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 07:24, 29 May 2009 (BST)
Theirs is still valid. Do you know why? Because they put something after their "Kill" vote, which as inane as it may be, is still technically valid according to everyone's fucked up view of the rules/guidelines. If you don't like it, tough. You don't actually care that their votes are invalid, so long as you can cause trouble. Get off your ass and change the rules if you care about it so much. But you know, that would require you to interact with people without being a dick.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 13:29, 29 May 2009 (BST)
Unless you intend to change every single one of these votes from every suggestion made on this wiki, I see no reason why you should nazi your way through this request any further than you've gotten already. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 13:32, 29 May 2009 (BST)

Historical Groups

Everything in the Imposters section needs the Historical Group template removing for both the page and talk page and both unprotecting.

Reasoning supplied at the bottom of the page. Action these. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 05:58, 27 May 2009 (BST)

Perhaps they would be better having an inactive template added -- boxy talkteh rulz 07:44 27 May 2009 (BST)
I agree, I'll add a {{InactiveGroup}} template to these (assuming another sysop doesn't get to them first.) Linkthewindow  Talk  07:53, 27 May 2009 (BST)
I am unconcerned with what (if anything it is replaced with), I believe I state in my reasoning that the only result I'm after is the removal of Historical status until they have passed the required vote. All of the groups will be classed as inactive though due to the time passed. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 07:58, 27 May 2009 (BST)

I went through this over a year ago removing some of the imposters. Looks a few more may have cropped up, but I think some of those really old ones were deemed historical before the system was set up, but it's hard to tell. --  AHLGTG 18:24, 27 May 2009 (BST)

You'll notice I foresaw such arguments in the section I correctly named 'Inevitable Whining'. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:36, 28 May 2009 (BST)
Uh, yeah. --  AHLGTG 02:44, 28 May 2009 (BST)


  1. 4 Corners Regulators
  2. Alliance of Giddings
  3. Axes High (Historic)
  4. Back_On_Strike
  5. Brain Central
  6. Council of Leaders (new)
  7. Council of Leaders (original)
  8. Giddings Defenders
  9. Iron Cross Brothers (original)
  10. PA Rebel Alliance
  11. The Pretorians
  12. Red-eye Republic
  13. The Undying Scourge
  14. Shambling Seagulls (2006)
  15. Shearbank Liberation Army
  16. The Stanbury Renegades
  17. The Apocalypse Horde
  18. The Gingerbread Men
  19. United Territories Federation

I've replaced the historical templates on the pages directly above with the inactive template -- boxy talkteh rulz 08:29 28 May 2009 (BST)

  1. Democratic Armed Republic of Independent Suburbs
  2. FOBU
  3. Mall Tour '06
  4. The Many
  5. The Ministry of the Dead
  6. Mockers
  7. On Strike
  8. RABH

But I've left the ones directly above this in the historical category, for now. As it says on the policy page, "all groups currently within the category will remain as long as they have a historical significance section added within a month of the passing of this policy". These pages seem to comply with that, having a section dedicated to how the groups fit in with the history of UD, and them being historical before the policy that brought in voting for historical status. The policy wasn't retroactive, as long as the group pages had a historical section on the page. Perhaps, if they all remain historical, they should be mentioned in the successful section of historical groups to make it easy to see which ones were from before voting was implemented -- boxy talkteh rulz 08:29 28 May 2009 (BST)

The need for that 'grandfathering' of status is no longer valid. Crit 12 was removed to preserve all groups. The grandfather clause was there to prevent their removal even though the owners may have not been active any longer. As this proviso no longer applies (these pages will never be removed due to the community getting rid of Crit 12), all the Historical template remaining on their pages does is create confusion over why the voting records can't be found and could lead to misuse of it again as well as the double standard based on their age. All groups with the Historical template should be made subject to a vote, especially since as there is no detriment to its removal. I swear I put all this on that page of mine.... -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 09:05, 28 May 2009 (BST)
Why should I give a shit what you put on your page? I don't bother reading much of it because it's not policy, and even if I felt the need to discuss anything there, any comment I make would be summarily deleted regardless of it's merit. The policy made it clear that existing historical groups would remain in the category. The best way to deal with it is to make note of the exceptions on the successful page. Any further additions to the category, that don't link to the page can then be removed simply -- boxy talkteh rulz 09:18 28 May 2009 (BST)
Why should you give a shit? Well perhaps that all requested edits require a reasoning, which is on that page. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 09:21, 28 May 2009 (BST)

The Gingerbread Men did get a historical vote (that passed). So did Axes High. You are clinically retarded if you think The Many, DARIS, (and eventually the Dead) aren't historical and need to be protected and preserved. But, this is an interesting new way to be annoying. Congrats!--– Nubis NWO 10:11, 28 May 2009 (BST)

Also, COL and SLA really need to be on the list of historical groups because of the dynamic they had with the clearly other historical groups DARIS/the Many. --– Nubis NWO 10:12, 28 May 2009 (BST)
I invite you to read the section of the page dedicated to your arguments before you even started typing them. The section is called Inevitable Whining. You may then nominate them for actual Historical status and receive a free vouch from me in the spirit of friendship and goodwill :D -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 11:16, 28 May 2009 (BST)
I will do just that tomorrow, actually. I'm expecting a big smiley vouch from you then, Iscariot =D DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 11:36, 28 May 2009 (BST)
Provided all the groups that I have requested have been altered appropriately, you can have a vouch for the ones I believe to be historical. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 12:25, 28 May 2009 (BST)

I've added a note about the remaining groups being "pre-voting" on the succeeded archive. Fin -- boxy talkteh rulz 22:58 28 May 2009 (BST)

You removed PARA, CoL, Renegades, Scourge, and Seagulls? The fuck gives you the authority to choose who is historical and who is not? Go unfuck yourself, faggot. --Sonny Corleone DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n 04:44, 9 June 2009 (BST)

Template:Verdict

Requesting temporary unprotection of this template so Rooster can do a bit of coding for us. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 14:37, 28 May 2009 (BST)

Done.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 14:37, 28 May 2009 (BST)

Rooster's finished, requesting reprotection. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 14:46, 28 May 2009 (BST)

Done.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 14:46, 28 May 2009 (BST)

The Iscariot-o-meter

Just a note to say that I have protected this page in my userspace. -- Cheese 14:33, 28 May 2009 (BST)

User talk:DanceDanceRevolution/Archive4

As per the previous 3, please. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 02:37, 26 May 2009 (BST)

Done. Linkthewindow  Talk  08:46, 26 May 2009 (BST)

UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/Civility policy/Arbitration page

Subpage of a Scheduled Protection, someone missed it. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 01:43, 19 May 2009 (BST)

Done. Linkthewindow  Talk  08:24, 19 May 2009 (BST)

Map Templates

Template:BINot
Template:BIPrevious
Template:BICurrent

-- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 15:45, 14 May 2009 (BST)

Done. Linkthewindow  Talk  22:31, 14 May 2009 (BST)

Template:BuildingStatus

Template:BuildingStatus - to stop people trying to edit the template instead of the page it's included on -- boxy talkteh rulz 02:24 5 May 2009 (BST)

Done. Linkthewindow  Talk  11:18, 5 May 2009 (BST)

Template:Groupbox

The crappy formatting of the example usage has annoyed me several times recently. Please change to the following:

{{Groupbox
 |group_name= 
 |group_image= 
 |group_abbrev= 
 |group_membership= 
 |group_leaders= 
 |group_goals= 
 |group_recruit= 
 |group_contact= 
 }}

Also, it would be nice if the documentation for protected templates was moved onto subpages so that it can be edited by normal users without disrupting template functioning. (See Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Template documentation.)

Cheers! ᚱᛖᚢᛖᚾᚨᚾ 10:41, 26 April 2009 (BST)

Done, the latter is a good idea, and I'll look at it more later. Linkthewindow  Talk  09:30, 2 May 2009 (BST)
Personal tools
advertisements