|
|
| (426 intermediate revisions by 38 users not shown) |
| Line 2: |
Line 2: |
| {{Administrationnav}} | | {{Administrationnav}} |
|
| |
|
| This page is for the reporting of administrator (sysop) misconduct within the Urban Dead wiki. Sysops are trusted with a considerable number of powers, many of which have the capacity to be abused. In many circumstances, it is possible for a sysop to cause considerable havoc. As such, users are provided this page to report misconduct from the System Operators. For consistency and accountability, sysops also adhere to the guidelines listed here. | | This page is for the reporting of administrator (sysop) misconduct within the Urban Dead wiki. Sysops are trusted with a considerable number of powers, many of which have the capacity to be abused. In many circumstances, it is possible for a sysop to cause considerable havoc. As such, users are provided this page to report misconduct from the System Operators. For consistency and accountability, sysops also adhere to the guidelines listed here. |
|
| |
|
| ==Guidelines for System Operator Misconduct Reporting== | | ==Guidelines for System Operator Misconduct Reporting== |
| The charge of Administrative Misconduct is a grave charge indeed. If misconduct occurs, it is important that the rest of the sysop team be able to review the charges as necessary. Any charge of administrative misconduct '''must''' be backed up with evidence. The clearest evidence that can be provided for administrative misconduct is a clear discrepancy between the relevant action log (deletion, block, or protection log) and the archives of the relevant administration service page, and this is a minimum standard of evidence admitted in such a tribunal. | | The charge of Administrative Misconduct is a grave charge indeed. If misconduct occurs, it is important that the rest of the sysop team be able to review the charges as necessary. Any charge of administrative misconduct '''must''' be backed up with evidence. The clearest evidence that can be provided for administrative misconduct is a clear discrepancy between the relevant action log (deletion, block, or protection log) and the archives of the relevant administration service page, and this is a minimum standard of evidence admitted in such a tribunal. |
|
| |
|
| Misconduct is primarily related to specific Administrator Services, not standards of behavior. As such, situations including verbal attacks by sysops, while frowned upon, do not constitute misconduct. Sysops on a wiki are in theory supposed to have no more authority than a regular user - they merely have a greater scope of power. Personality conflicts between sysops and regular users should be treated just as a personality conflict between two regular users. If, in the course of such a conflict, a sysop abuses their administrative powers by banning a user, blocking or deleting a page without due process, that ''is'' misconduct, and should be reported to this page. | | Misconduct is primarily related to specific Administrator Services, not standards of behavior. As such, situations including verbal attacks by sysops, while frowned upon, do not constitute misconduct. Sysops on a wiki are in theory supposed to have no more authority than a regular user - they merely have a greater scope of power. Personality conflicts between sysops and regular users should be treated just as a personality conflict between two regular users. If, in the course of such a conflict, a sysop abuses their administrative powers by banning a user, blocking or deleting a page without due process, that ''is'' misconduct, and should be reported to this page. |
|
| |
|
| There is, however, an exception to this rule - excessive bullying, or attempts to treat the status of sysop as a badge of authority to force a sysop's wishes on the wiki may also come under misconduct. Any accusations of this should come with just as clear evidence, and for such an action to be declared misconduct, there should be a clear pattern of behavior across a considerable period of time. | | There is, however, an exception to this rule - excessive bullying, or attempts to treat the status of sysop as a badge of authority to force a sysop's wishes on the wiki may also come under misconduct. Any accusations of this should come with just as clear evidence, and for such an action to be declared misconduct, there should be a clear pattern of behavior across a considerable period of time. |
| Line 43: |
Line 43: |
|
| |
|
| ==Misconduct Cases Currently Under Consideration== | | ==Misconduct Cases Currently Under Consideration== |
| <!--
| | ''There are no cases under consideration.'' |
| ''There are currently no misconduct cases under consideration''. | |
| -->
| |
|
| |
|
| ===[[User:The General]]=== | | ==Concluded Misconduct Cases== |
| Issued a warning without updating A/VD! This blatant violation of {{WIKILAW}} cannot be tolerated.-[[User:JohnnyCakes|JohnnyCakes]] 10:33, 17 July 2011 (BST)
| | Check the [[UDWiki:Administration/Misconduct/Archive|Archive]] for concluded Misconduct cases. |
| | |
| Dumb mistake but certainly '''not misconduct'''. Now get out. -- [[Image:Cat Pic.png|14px]] [[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''Thadeous Oakley''']]</span> [[User_Talk:MisterGame|<span style= "color: black; background-color: white">'''''Talk''''']]</span> 11:33, 17 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| '''Not misconduct''' <small>-- [[User:Boxy|boxy]] 11:41, 17 July 2011 (BST)</small>
| |
| | |
| '''Not misconduct''' - de minimis non curat sys-op. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 14:42, 17 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| A sysop is expected to be able to do the paperwork properly if he wishes to handle them and he's missed this a couple of times and I think a warning would be as good as any way to maybe tell him that it's important to do it ''right''. We're humans not robots and mistakes on the job are things I expect, but if this happens in future I wouldn't hesitate to rule misconduct because it's pretty bloody straightforward and if he wants the ability to rule and warn so badly he should be prepared to do the '''necessary''' work that comes alongside it. If you're on a blackberry and accessing a page the size of A/VD is difficult and cumbersome, then don't warn at all. -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 15:28, 17 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| '''Not Misconduct''' with several cases ongoing against one individual, errors can creep in. Saying that General, DDR is ''technically'' correct. --[[User:Rosslessness|Rosslessness]] 16:24, 17 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| Hey general, update VD next time, k?--[[User:Yonnua Koponen|<span style="color: DarkOrange">Yonnua Koponen</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Yonnua Koponen| <span style="color:Gold">T</span>]][[DvB| <span style="color: Goldenrod">G</span>]]</sup><sup><span class="plainlinks">[http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=840689 <span style="color: DarkGoldenrod"> P</span>] </span></sup> [[User:Yonnua Koponen/Sandbox|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[Discosaurs|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[{{TALKPAGENAME}}#Donkey|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]] 16:27, 17 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| ===[[User:Spiderzed]]===
| |
| | |
| The [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&limit=250&month=&year=| Special Logs] for today shows that Spiderzed has moved [[Cobra/Joining]] , [[Cobra/Guide]] , and [[Cobra/Diplomacy]] to [[Cobra (Group)]] sub-pages. Spiderzed even submitted them to [[UDWiki:Administration/Move_Requests#Cobra_pages]] That's not what I'm here about though. As that's perfectly fine and acceptable. He's well within his rights to do so. However, redirecting the original pages to his pages '''is''' why I'm here. Under wiki protocol those sub-pages on [[Cobra]] need to either be blanked or deleted (and I'm pretty sure it's deleted and not blanked). As a Sysop Spiderzed should know this, but went ahead and did things his way regardless. I see this is a very cut and dry case of Misconduct. I would suggest that the sub-pages be handled as proper protocol dictates as well as whatever punishment protocol would dictate for Spiderzed's misconduct. -- {{User:Goribus/Sig}} 01:37, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| :Uhh, Gor, the wiki automatically puts those redirects in when it moves the pages. :P I'll delete them, which Spidey should really have done, but it's not really ever been misconduct to miss out a part of a move. Unless you can prove malicious intent, however, in which case, obviously it would be misconduct.--[[User:Yonnua Koponen|<span style="color: DarkOrange">Yonnua Koponen</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Yonnua Koponen| <span style="color:Gold">T</span>]][[DvB| <span style="color: Goldenrod">G</span>]]</sup><sup><span class="plainlinks">[http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=840689 <span style="color: DarkGoldenrod"> P</span>] </span></sup> [[User:Yonnua Koponen/Sandbox|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[Discosaurs|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[{{TALKPAGENAME}}#Donkey|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]] 02:23, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| ::I've deleted the redirect stubs, and moved all non-contextual links to redirect to the Cobra (group) versions.--[[User:Yonnua Koponen|<span style="color: DarkOrange">Yonnua Koponen</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Yonnua Koponen| <span style="color:Gold">T</span>]][[DvB| <span style="color: Goldenrod">G</span>]]</sup><sup><span class="plainlinks">[http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=840689 <span style="color: DarkGoldenrod"> P</span>] </span></sup> [[User:Yonnua Koponen/Sandbox|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[Discosaurs|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[{{TALKPAGENAME}}#Donkey|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]] 02:32, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| ::Actually, no, that is not the case. The wiki software '''does not''' automatically create redirects: there is a checkbox by which redirect creation may be selected or deselected. (See [[:File:PageMoveExample.png|screenshot]].) That in itself would normally not be so bad, and were it any other sysop I would not have an issue, but I find it hard to believe that Spiderzed did not know what he was doing; moreover, as an involved party who has been involved in a protracted edit dispute and arbitration case over these group pages, he should have know better than to move them himself, but instead filed a request or asked another sysop to do so.<br/> He did not do, so now he should deal with the consequences: this is '''technical misconduct''', and may furthermore constitute a breach of his Arbitration ruling. (I've not checked the exact terms, although [[A/A]] breaches are normally handled via A/VB, so this angle should probably be pursued there or via [[User talk:Karek|Karek's talk page]].)<br/> That said, I fully expect most sysops to band together and protect one of their own from “harassment” – I'll be very (and favourably) surprised if this results in a ruling of Misconfuct. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 08:54, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| :::Doesn't help that he showed he knew he shouldn't be the one moving them previously at that. Technical misconduct, absolutely, failure of judgment most definitely. Vandalism? Not really. Easily fixed with deletion by scheduled. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 09:11, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| :::Uhm, Rev, there's no option not to create a redirect when moving pages. Look at your own screenshot more carefully. Not that I think that it changes your point at all. Just saying, that's all.~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>10:09, 9 July 2011 (UTC)</sub>
| |
| ::::Yeah, LOLwhat -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 10:52, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| :::::So tempted to put Rev up for misconduct for bias in his ruling where he says:"were it any other sysop I would not have an issue".--[[User:Yonnua Koponen|<span style="color: DarkOrange">Yonnua Koponen</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Yonnua Koponen| <span style="color:Gold">T</span>]][[DvB| <span style="color: Goldenrod">G</span>]]</sup><sup><span class="plainlinks">[http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=840689 <span style="color: DarkGoldenrod"> P</span>] </span></sup> [[User:Yonnua Koponen/Sandbox|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[Discosaurs|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[{{TALKPAGENAME}}#Donkey|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]] 12:11, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| ::::::'''Because he's an involved party in an arbitration concerning these pages''', you nimrod. Go ahead, I could use some laughs. Creating a Misconduct case over a minority Misconduct report would be hilariously farcical and absolutely par for the course. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 12:28, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| :::::::Dude, it was a joke. O.o --[[User:Yonnua Koponen|<span style="color: DarkOrange">Yonnua Koponen</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Yonnua Koponen| <span style="color:Gold">T</span>]][[DvB| <span style="color: Goldenrod">G</span>]]</sup><sup><span class="plainlinks">[http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=840689 <span style="color: DarkGoldenrod"> P</span>] </span></sup> [[User:Yonnua Koponen/Sandbox|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[Discosaurs|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[{{TALKPAGENAME}}#Donkey|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]] 12:28, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| ::::::::Wait. You took me seriously? o.O ''…Why?'' I personally try not to take anyone seriously if I can help it. '''Especially''' not myself. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 04:26, 13 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| ::::::Personally I'd say no, he didn't actually rule by the looks of it. If he did there could be a couple of ones someone could pounce on, namely not reading before ruling (something I'm quite sure Karek put Conn up for misconduct a few years ago), etc. I'm not really fussed about it personally, beyond the lols and fail, as well as the possibility he was just trolling us all, in which he's fucking had me beat all evening, for sure! -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 12:31, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| ::::Oh. Huh. Yeah, my bad! Been spending too long on other, more functional wikis. {{tongue}} <small> Also, it's been a long week and I've been drinking… {{shifty}}</small><br/>[http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Moving_a_page#Moving_a_page_without_creating_a_redirect Here's] what I meant to show you guys. Guess I need to add the <tt>suppressredirect</tt> right to the [[User:Revenant/Sandbox/PageFoundry/Devolution of power|list]]. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 12:28, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| Poor form? Lazy? Possibly. However, it's an automatic part of the move function which sysops on this wiki tend to never ever need to mess with and therefore don't. Having someone come and discuss it first rather than assume it was malicious would have probably had the better outcome here, as it seems to have been fixed without any issue and I highly doubt SZ did it to force such a thing happening. '''Not misconduct'''. -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 03:11, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| Yep, looks like a simple case of missed deletion of redirect caused by page moves. Happens so often that there is a scheduled deletion criteria for them when ops miss them. SZ mentioned on a/m that the move took a few extra steps than normal so my guess is that he got wrapped up in the intricacies of those steps and failed to put the finishing touches. '''Not Misconduct'''. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>04:16, 9 July 2011 (UTC)</sub>
| |
| | |
| Ironically, I'll be very (and favourably) surprised if this results in a ruling of Not Misconfuct. --[[User:Rosslessness|Rosslessness]] 09:42, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| :I'd need more than an image from Rev proving our point ''even more'' rather than his own before I give this Misconfuct at all. Then again, I'm just an evil sysop trying to protect my own! Even though Spiderzed doesn't like me and I barely know or care who he is! -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 11:03, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| | |
| Revenant cropped the original print screen, if he hadn't have, and shown the description text above, it would have shown something similar to [[File:MOVE MISCONDUCT.jpg|50px]] where it states ''"The old title will become a redirect to the new title"'', without any description of any option to turn it off. As Karek said, SZ said he probably shouldn't be doing the moves himself, but he did and Goribus had no issue with that in itself, and is something I don't see as an issue in itself either, at least relative to misconduct. -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 11:14, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| I don't really see an abuse of sysop power here. Was it bad practice not to delete the redirects? Yes. Could it have simply been a mistake? Yes. Did he gain any long-term advantage from it? No. Hence, I think this is '''not misconduct'''.--<span>[[User:The General|The General]] <sup>[[User Talk:The General|T]] [[Special:ListUsers/sysop|<span title="System Operator">Sys</span>]] [[Project_UnWelcome|<span title="Project UnWelcome">U!</span>]] [[Project Wiki Patrol|<span title="Project Wiki Patrol">P!</span>]] <span class="plainlinks">[http://urbandeadwiki.smfforfree.com/index.php <span title="Urban Dead Wiki Forum">F!</span>]</span></sup></span> 11:27, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| :BTW, the "supress redirect" permission is, for some reason, not assigned to sysops. I posted on Kevan's talk page about it a while ago but didn't get a response.--<span>[[User:The General|The General]] <sup>[[User Talk:The General|T]] [[Special:ListUsers/sysop|<span title="System Operator">Sys</span>]] [[Project_UnWelcome|<span title="Project UnWelcome">U!</span>]] [[Project Wiki Patrol|<span title="Project Wiki Patrol">P!</span>]] <span class="plainlinks">[http://urbandeadwiki.smfforfree.com/index.php <span title="Urban Dead Wiki Forum">F!</span>]</span></sup></span> 11:27, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| ::Probably just wasn't added automatically when the software was upgraded to support that feature. We should really write up and sign off on a comprehensive list of tweaks for Kevan to do when he next gets a chance. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 04:30, 13 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| I had actually filed a very similar move request some days ago. It didn't face resistance but for the ongoing arbies, so I figured that it was ripe to be carried out. Also note some other things:
| |
| #The page already existed as copied code (against which no one objected). The move was only about keeping the edit history of the page in one place.
| |
| #The pages were blanked by Goribus, proving he had no interest into them.
| |
| #Due to the existing copies, a move required additionally deletions, making it a good bit more complicated than the run-of-the-mill move. As I had created that extra work by creating copies, I figured I should be the one who carries the extra workload for it. (And even that not perfectly, if you look at [[Talk:Cobra/Guide]]/[[Talk:Cobra (group)/Guide]], where I had missed that a copy existed.
| |
| #All the pages were effectively Crit 7. It shouldn't be a question at all whether they could be moved or not, [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=UDWiki%3AAdministration%2FMove_Requests&action=historysubmit&diff=1914225&oldid=1914224 as noted by Rev].
| |
| I'd have dealt with the remaining incoming links over the course of today, and then deleted the redirects as they'd be done with their purpose. (That being said, I think [[Cobra/Guide]] (and solely [[Cobra/Guide]]) should be kept, as it is a featured guide and as such has a good number of external links going to it. But that is a question for elsewhere, not for A/M.) --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 11:53, 9 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| :I don't disagree that you ''should'' be able to move them (page move rights should be delegated to Autoconfirmed users, IMO, which is what I was getting at in the note you cite), but as it stands it is a sysop-only action. You were an involved party in the dispute, so you should have let someone else handle it to avoid any appearance of personal bias in the way you handled it. You went ahead and did it yourself, and did so in a way which favoured your side in the conflict, thus furthering your own personal agenda. Even if, as you say (and I have no reason not to take you at your word), you still used a sysop-only power and made a procedural mistake which benefited you. Thus my ruling of ''technical misconduct'' due to violating procedure designed to defuse personal involvement.<br/> I don't see this being more than a slap on the wrist if it comes through, but it needs to be reinforced that we have enough sysops on the team that sysops shouldn't '''need''' to use sysop powers where there could be considered even a sniff of personal involvement. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 04:36, 13 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| '''Not Misconduct''' - Should have left it for one of us to do but not deleting the redirects after the move isn't anything more than either laziness or forgetfulness. -- {{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 23:13, 11 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| This has been sitting undiscussed for a week now. Would any uninvolved op mind to tally and cycle this? --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 12:52, 20 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| '''Not Misconduct''' making my opinion clear. --[[User:Rosslessness|Rosslessness]] 12:55, 20 July 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| ==Recently Concluded Misconduct Cases==
| |
| <!--
| |
| ''There are currently no recently concluded misconduct cases. Check the [[UDWiki:Administration/Misconduct/Archive|Archive]] for older cases''
| |
| -->
| |
This page is for the reporting of administrator (sysop) misconduct within the Urban Dead wiki. Sysops are trusted with a considerable number of powers, many of which have the capacity to be abused. In many circumstances, it is possible for a sysop to cause considerable havoc. As such, users are provided this page to report misconduct from the System Operators. For consistency and accountability, sysops also adhere to the guidelines listed here.
Guidelines for System Operator Misconduct Reporting
The charge of Administrative Misconduct is a grave charge indeed. If misconduct occurs, it is important that the rest of the sysop team be able to review the charges as necessary. Any charge of administrative misconduct must be backed up with evidence. The clearest evidence that can be provided for administrative misconduct is a clear discrepancy between the relevant action log (deletion, block, or protection log) and the archives of the relevant administration service page, and this is a minimum standard of evidence admitted in such a tribunal.
Misconduct is primarily related to specific Administrator Services, not standards of behavior. As such, situations including verbal attacks by sysops, while frowned upon, do not constitute misconduct. Sysops on a wiki are in theory supposed to have no more authority than a regular user - they merely have a greater scope of power. Personality conflicts between sysops and regular users should be treated just as a personality conflict between two regular users. If, in the course of such a conflict, a sysop abuses their administrative powers by banning a user, blocking or deleting a page without due process, that is misconduct, and should be reported to this page.
There is, however, an exception to this rule - excessive bullying, or attempts to treat the status of sysop as a badge of authority to force a sysop's wishes on the wiki may also come under misconduct. Any accusations of this should come with just as clear evidence, and for such an action to be declared misconduct, there should be a clear pattern of behavior across a considerable period of time.
All discussion of misconduct should occur on this page, not the talk page - any discussion on the talk page will be merged into this page once discovered. Once a misconduct case has been declared closed, a member of the sysop team other than the sysop named in the case will mete out the punishment (if deemed necessary), and then move the case to the Archive.
Administrative Abilities
For future reference, the following are sysop specific abilities (ie things that sysops can do that regular users cannot):
- Deletion (ie complete removal, as opposed to blanking) of pages (including Images and any other page-like construct on this wiki), through the delete tab on the top of any deletable construct.
- Undeletion (ie returning a page, complete with page history) of pages (including any other page-like construct on this wiki (Images are not included as deletion of an image is not undoable), through the undelete tab on the top of any undeletable construct
- Protection of pages (ie removing the ability of regular users to edit or move a particular page), through the protect tab on the top of any protectable construct.
- Moving of pages (ie changing a page complete with the page's history to a different namespace).
- Warning users reported in Vandal Banning.
- Banning of Users (ie removing the ability of a specific user to edit the wiki), through the Block User page.
- Editing of Protected pages by any means.
- Research IP activity using the CheckUser extension.
- (Bureaucrats Only) Promotion (providing the above abilities) of User to Sysop/Bureaucrat status.
If none of the above abilities were abused and the case doesn't apply for the exception mentioned above, then this is a case for UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration or UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning.
Example of Misconduct Proceedings
Sysop seems to have deleted Bad Page, but I can't find it in the Archives of either the Deletion or Speedy Deletion pages. The Logs show a deletion at 18:06, October 24th 2005 by a System Operator, but this does not seem to be backed up by a request for that deletion. I would like to know why this is the case -- Reporter 13:42, 28 Oct 2005 (BST)
- The deletion was asked through my talk page. I give my Talk page as proof of this. -- Sysop 13:42, 28 Oct 2005 (BST)
- It looks like the page that was deleted did not belong to the requesting user, so you were in no position to delete it on sight. -- Reporter 13:42, 28 Oct 2005 (BST)
- You know the rules, Sysop. All deletion requests have to go through the Speedy Delete page. Next time, please inform the user where they should lodge the request. This is a clear violation, will you accept a one-day ban as punishment? -- Sysop2 13:42, 28 Oct 2005 (BST)
- I'm not liking it, but I clearly broke the rules, I'll accept the ban. I'll certainly remember due process next time... Sysop 13:42, 28 Oct 2005 (BST)
- As punishment for failing to follow due process, Sysop has been banned for a period of 24 hours. This will be moved to the Archive shortly. -- Sysop2 13:42, 28 Oct 2005 (BST)
Before Reporting Misconduct
Due to a the growing number of Non-Misconduct cases popping up on this page the Administration Staff has decided to compile a basic summary of what has been viewed as Not Misconduct in the past. Please read over UDWiki:Misconduct and make sure that what you are reporting is in fact misconduct before filing a report here.
Cases made to further personal disputes should never be made here, harassment of any user through administration pages may result in vandal escalations. Despite their unique status this basic protection does still apply to Sysops.
Misconduct Cases Currently Under Consideration
There are no cases under consideration.
Concluded Misconduct Cases
Check the Archive for concluded Misconduct cases.
