UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2010 06

This page is for the reporting of vandalism within the Urban Dead wiki, as defined by vandalism policy. On this wiki, the punishment for Vandalism is temporary banning, but due to security concerns, the ability to mete out this punishment is restricted to System Operators. As such, regular users will need to lodge a report for a Vandal to be banned from the wiki. For consistency and accountability, System Operators are requested to note on this board their actions in dealing with Vandals.

Guidelines for Vandalism Reporting

In dealing with Vandalism, time is often of the essence. As such, we ask that all users include the following information in a Vandalism report:

• A link to the pages in question.

Preferably bolded for visibility. If the Vandalism is occurring over a sufficiently large number of pages, instead include a time range of the vandalism attempt, or alternatively, a link to the first vandalised page. This allows us to quickly find the damage so we can quickly assess the situation.

• The user name of the Vandal.

This allows us to more easily identify the culprit, and to check details.

• A signed datestamp.

For accountability purposes, we ask that you record in your request your user name and the time you lodged the report.

• Please report at the top.

There's conflict with where to post and a lot of the reports are missed. If it's placed at the top of the page it's probably going to be seen and dealt with.

If you see Vandalism in progress, don't wait for System Operators to deal with it, as there may be no System Operator online at the time. Lodge the report, then start reverting pages back to their original form. This can be done by going to the "History" tab at the top of the page, and finding the last edit before the Vandal's attack. When a System Operator is available, they'll assess the situation, and if the report is legitimate, we will take steps to either warn the vandal, or ban them if they are on their second warning.

If the page is long, you can add new reports by editing the top report and placing your new report above its header in the edit screen.

Before Submitting a Report

• This page, Vandal Banning, deals with bad-faith breaches of official policy.
• Interpersonal complaints are better sorted out at UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration.
• As much as is practical, assume good faith and try to iron out problems with other users one to one, only using this page as a last resort.
• Avoid submitting reports which are petty.

Vandalism Report Space

Administration Notice Talk with the user before reporting or accusing someone of vandalism for small edits. In most cases it's simply a case of a new user that doesn't know how this wiki works. Sometimes assuming good faith and speaking with others can avoid a lot of drama, and can even help newbies feel part of this community. Administration Notice If you are not a System Operator, the user who made the vandal report, the user being reported, or directly involved in the case, the administration asks that you use the talk page for further discussion. Free-for-all commenting can lead to a less respectful environment. Administration Notice Warned users can remove one entry of their warning history every one month and 250 edits after their last warning. Remember to ask a sysop to remove them in due time. You are as responsible for keeping track of your history as the sysops are; In case of a sysop wrongly punishing you due to an outdated history, he might not be punished for his actions.

Spambots

Spambots are to be reported on this page. New reports should be added to the top. Reports may be purged after one week.

June 2010

User:Jorm

Jorm (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Verdict	Vandalism
Action taken	Warned

Here. Page-breaking edits to the Mayor page, and more importantly, reverting them back in. Obviously arbitration didn't work, looks like we need to resort to a warning instead :/ . Vandalism for bad-faith natured edits plz.--Thadeous Oakley 20:38, 6 June 2010 (BST)

1, 2 --Thadeous Oakley 20:46, 6 June 2010 (BST)

I consider myself an involved party, and shall not be ruling.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:58, 6 June 2010 (BST)

Meh. --Thadeous Oakley 23:02, 6 June 2010 (BST)

Vandalism. Argh. I used to like that guy. 21:03, 6 June 2010 (BST)

I hear ya. Never met Jorm before, but I had expected something better from the person founding the MOB, Nexuswar and Barhar.com --Thadeous Oakley 22:04, 6 June 2010 (BST)

It's BARHAH dot com. BARHAH. "Barhar" is what douchebag harmans say.--Jorm 08:04, 7 June 2010 (BST)

I know this will get moved to talk, but WHAT THE FUCK. This is why roleplaying is dead in this game. All it can take is for one shitbrain to fuck it up the arse and the fun is ruined. Goddamn it. --

 

 

 

 

03:10, 7 June 2010 (BST)

The "fun" was ruined once you 'shitbrains' applied fucking rules to it. Also, get the fuck off my IRC server, you douchetard, if you're that upset with me. I don't want you there.--Jorm 08:04, 7 June 2010 (BST)

any further discussion to the talkpage please -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:20 7 June 2010 (BST)

Christ. How hard is it to get vandal banned these days by you tight-assed shitheels? Seriously? You're all lubricant and no fucking. Your shit stinks to high heaven. Please ban me so that people will pay attention to how retarded you are. I'm not sure how much plainer I can be. (Please note that I have a five year history of stirring shit and then eating people who are high on their horses and think that they are right).

Let's get on with the banning! Please!--Jorm 07:36, 7 June 2010 (BST)

Warned - a while ago -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:20 7 June 2010 (BST)

I accept this warning, at this level of visibility, and will henceforth work to become a better user of this wiki.--Jorm 09:24, 7 June 2010 (BST)

User:My sister

My sister (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Verdict	Vandalism
Action taken	Permaban

for this edit [1]. --

 

 

 

 

15:17, 6 June 2010 (BST)

There are no excuses for potty mouths, young man. --My sister 15:20, 6 June 2010 (BST)

Lol. Although I appreciate the originality, I don't think this is nearly worth the effort you would have gone to to do that. --

 

 

 

 

15:22, 6 June 2010 (BST)

Looks like they just did a find and replace all, since they were replacing the "ass" in "massive" with "hiney" and things of that sort. —Aichon— 18:48, 6 June 2010 (BST)

But they did find and replace to so many different terms, more than I could have bothered, even the term 'hell' in 'helloooooooooo'. crazy stuff ;D --

 

 

 

 

03:12, 7 June 2010 (BST)

Vandalisms - Impersonation. Of particular note I recall a case where someone editted one of DDR's comments to remove obscenity.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:14, 6 June 2010 (BST)

It's perma time >=D And the case was SA's. --

 

 

 

 

16:29, 6 June 2010 (BST)

Does the edit on this page count as part of the three-edit rule? I'm just being careful what with Aichon's A/M case.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:07, 6 June 2010 (BST)

Is it constructive? No. Does it show the user knows about vandal banning? Yes. Does that sound like a newbish mistake? No. So Perma the fellow. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 17:10, 6 June 2010 (BST)

Done.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:15, 6 June 2010 (BST)

User:Lonercs

Lonercs (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Verdict	Vandalism
Action taken	Warning

Made clearly bad-faith edits to No Escape to such an extent that I had to wait a half hour for him to finish before submitting this, and I'm not even sure he's done. --VVV ^RPGMBCWS 06:06, 6 June 2010 (BST)

He has now blanked both the main and talk page. --VVV ^RPGMBCWS 06:22, 6 June 2010 (BST)

Permabanned, three edit rule. It's clear what his intentions were (check the edit here), and none of his edits were beneficial to the majority of the community or constructive. —Aichon— 06:35, 6 June 2010 (BST)

For later reference, here are his vandal edits: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19]. I especially like the last one. —Aichon— 06:58, 6 June 2010 (BST)

Vandalism - but the 3 edit rule can't be invoked here, he has contributory edits back in April, to a group page, danger reports and location pages. I'm unbanning -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:44 6 June 2010 (BST)

I believe this would be miscontribution but I'll get banned for bringing it up. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n} 09:58, 6 June 2010 (BST)

I don't think you understand the system. Putting a up cases of misconduct which you actually think are misconduct doesn't warrant vandalism. Do you see the connection? Although I'm hoping you don't, because as it currently stands it seems you've learned your lesson- and then some. Which, of course, is all the better. --

 

 

 

 

11:30, 6 June 2010 (BST)

Vandalism - But no three edit rule.-Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 11:05, 6 June 2010 (BST)

User:Poodle of doom

Poodle_of_doom (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Verdict	Self requested
Action taken	1 year ban

Keep them rolling fellas. I obviously have no place on this wiki.... -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 00:47, 2 June 2010 (BST)

Let's make it a perma ban... I could still email someone in the future if I wanted to come back right? -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 03:25, 2 June 2010 (BST)

Per-ma-nent: intended to exist or function for a long, indefinite period without regard to unforeseeable conditions. Thought I looked it up for you. --Thadeous Oakley 19:36, 2 June 2010 (BST)

I'll tell you what, how about a year? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:38, 2 June 2010 (BST)

Done at a year -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 08:10 3 June 2010 (BST)

Ugh.. I know given my apparent bias and blind hatred towards this user you might think I'm trying to be as harsh as possible (sarcasm btw), but he requested a perma specifically and I recon that's what should happen. He as a user is in control of his own account's bantime and he's exercising that right (unlike last time where I think a week ban was a good idea box) but I really think it should be what he wants now. It feels like we're just screwing him around now. --

 

 

 

 

09:04, 3 June 2010 (BST)

I agree with DDR, but since I've been around for a grand sum of a month, I don't feel right over-ruling both of UDwiki's Bureaucrats. What's the general sysop consensus?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 11:01, 3 June 2010 (BST)

I think it doesn't matter. A self-imposed ban can be overturned at any time by the user who requested it, so it's essentially meaningless anyway. One year or ten years, it doesn't matter, since if he doesn't want to come back after a year, he won't, and if he does, he will. Having or not having the ban makes no difference. Since it's already been set at a year, I'd leave it, since it's simply not worth the hassle, but in the future, I'd do perma. —Aichon— 11:06, 3 June 2010 (BST)

Agreeing with the Box and Ross. A year's fine. If he eventually cools off and decides to come back earlier than that, he can just email one of us and we can lift the ban. -- Cheese 19:36, 3 June 2010 (BST)

User:CRAIGBOUNCE

CRAIGBOUNCE (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Verdict	{{{1}}}
Action taken	{{{2}}}

Screwing with this page, changing ID numbers and deleting screencaps. I'm not entirely satisfied that this is in good faith, considering several of the profiles don't match the names given and there's also some impersonation further down. -- Cheese 16:37, 1 June 2010 (BST)

He's reverting. --Thadeous Oakley 16:38, 1 June 2010 (BST)

I gots my eye on him. -- Cheese 16:39, 1 June 2010 (BST)

Sorry, missed this with the new month and new pages. Anyway, I'd like to see what his response is on his talk page to your question. I'm not convinced they're bad faith, but I certainly don't understand them or their nature right now. —Aichon— 11:10, 3 June 2010 (BST)

The fact that he made two questionable edits, then left and didn't come back doesn't really speak volumes for him, but ultimately, he'll either come back, answer your question, and we'll have an answer, or he won't come back, in which case it isn't really important what we do.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 11:24, 3 June 2010 (BST)

He hasn't come back. If he isn't back by later tonight, and nobody has any objections, I'll close this as not vandalism, but we'll keep an eye on him.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:47, 5 June 2010 (BST)

Vandalism Slap him with a warning. Regardless of whether he comes back. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 21:23, 5 June 2010 (BST)