UDWiki:Administration/Misconduct

Shortcut:
A/M

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 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)

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)

Misconduct Cases Currently Under Consideration

Karek

Protected A/VB and A/SD in violation of The guidelines of this wiki. It is not subject to scheduling, it was not being vandalised, and there was no protections request filed through A/PT. Relevant logs Here and Here for A/VB and A/SD respectively. Ive just unfucked them so the pages are usable again. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 19:02, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Those links don't seem to work. Try these: ein und zwei. -- Cheese 19:22, 20 August 2008 (BST)

There was a problem regarding that apparently protected pages don't allow normal users to see Transcluded Edit links(the whole purpose of the rework was/is to remove the ability to edit the 2000+ diff page while keeping usability). --Karek^maps?! 19:33, 20 August 2008 (BST)

I fully understand and support what you were trying to do, i just wish you did it by the book. Thats why we are here. A little more testing pre-implimentation would not have hurt either. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 19:43, 20 August 2008 (BST)

What does that mean in English? O_o -- Cheese 20:10, 20 August 2008 (BST)

I like what he is doing to A/SD and A/VB. He should have followed the guidelines in implimenting the protections part, and he should have tested it too first. Im sorry, but if what i said last was unclear then perhaps you are in dire need of something to do your thinking for you. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 20:26, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Yeah, it was pretty simple...

Also, Couldn't Karek have posted some kind of disclaimer or warning or notification that he was doing it? Quite a panic could have arisen amongst normal users if a large amount had logged on to discover the A/VB page out of action. Anything from a footnote to a WikiNews event would have greatly helped. Techercizer ^(Food) _(TSoE) 20:30, 20 August 2008 (BST)

I got the bit you said, I was wondering about what Karek said. -- Cheese 20:57, 20 August 2008 (BST)

The A/VB and A/SD pages became locked solid, normal users couldn't edit them or their discussion pages in any way (including to make reports) Techercizer ^(Food) _(TSoE) 21:24, 20 August 2008 (BST)

I am glad I am not a sysop ... Because on the one hand, what Karek did was not bad faith, it was an attempt to improve things. Be bold! as the saying goes... But on the other hand, he fucked up. Badly. And, didn't go through standard procedures... So one the one hand, demoting Karek doesn't really seem to follow the spirit of policy -- because there was no wilful abuse of sysop powers going down. But on the other hand... it really made a mess... Good luck with this, ladies and Germs fans. --WanYao 23:10, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Before I do anything, what was the purpose of protecting those pages? --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:50, 20 August 2008 (BST)

It's to do with this discussion, presumably the protection was done so that other users didn't attempt to edit the main A/VB page instead of the sections as they are meant to in this new system (sort of like people used to edit their suggestions into the category page instead of creating new pages when we changed the suggestions system). Unfortunately the section edit links show up for sysops on protected pages, but not for ordinary users. A minor hiccup, brought on by only discussing it in the sysop discussion area :-/ -- boxy ^{talk • i} 00:04 21 August 2008 (BST)

You could always make a fake [edit] to fix that problem. Should be no different. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 00:10, 21 August 2008 (BST)