UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2010 06

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search


Administration Services

Sysop List (Check) | Guidelines | Policies (Discussion) | Promotions (Bureaucrat) | Re-Evaluations

Deletions (Scheduling) | Speedy Deletions | Undeletions | Vandal Banning (Bots) | Vandal Data (De-Escalations)

Protections (Scheduling) | Move Requests | Arbitration | Misconduct | Demotions | Discussion | Sysop Archives

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:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3

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

Verdict
Action taken {{{2}}}

Basically looking for a soft warning for his continual none constructive comments on this page. Look below and you will find only 1 case he did not comment on, 1 he was entitled to and 4 where his comments are either backseat modding or outright trolling. Check the archives too and i think you might well see its been a bit of a trend since his demotion. Given I have not called him on this (and can't see any evidence that anyone else has either) I'm really only looking for his wrist to be slapped as a reminder that he is no longer a sysop (well until his promotion bid goes through) --Honestmistake 09:18, 8 June 2010 (BST)

User:Misanthropy

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

Verdict Not Vandalism
Action taken {{{2}}}

Made a spamming post in Promotions here. He knowingly placed a user for promotion despite the user not meeting requirements. As per the Woot precedent he is guilty of spamming. --Sonny Corleone DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n 05:53, 8 June 2010 (BST)

Not Vandalism - A whole category of precedent. Also, I voted Vandalism with WOOT because he had a history of doing it, being escalated, and continued to do it, despite making no attempt to improve on the number of criteria in the guidelines that he failed to meet between each nomination. None of that applies here. —Aichon— 06:01, 8 June 2010 (BST)

Misanthropy knows I do not meet the criteria and obviously made it to call me out. That is bad faith in the most conservative of definitions. Your love for Misanthropy is borderline obscene, you fucking basement dweller. --Sonny Corleone DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n 06:03, 8 June 2010 (BST)
Actually, precedent on Woot has been set. He DID NOT make 2 bids that did not meet criteria. His first bid here was well within the guidelines. By the time of his second bid here he was not within the guidelines for sysop. So the one time that you did vote vandalism against him was his first time making a bid that was outside of the guidelines. So the first time breaking the rules is a precedent for vandal banning. Misanthropy has made only one rule break in promotions, thus he fits the precedent. Prepare to eat my shit. --Sonny Corleone DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n 06:11, 8 June 2010 (BST)
So wait, you don't actually want to change a thing about the wiki? Your endless spastic flailing at the keyboard seemed to us like an indication that you did. Then again that might require that we assume you can make your own decisions without mummy helping. Strength is just an accident arising from the weakness of others 06:08, 8 June 2010 (BST)
I don't believe in breaking the rules is necessary to make the wiki better. Thanks for admitting that you think you're above the rules. Also, thanks for admitting you did it IN BAD FAITH. --Sonny Corleone DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n 06:11, 8 June 2010 (BST)
Point out where I did either of those things, I appear to have admitted to wanting to give you the chance to make a difference. Strength is just an accident arising from the weakness of others 06:16, 8 June 2010 (BST)
"So wait, you don't actually want to change a thing about the wiki? Your endless spastic flailing at the keyboard seemed to us like an indication that you did. Then again that might require that we assume you can make your own decisions without mummy helping." Right there you say you did not seriously expect me to become a sysop because I need my mother to make decisions for me. Making a nomination without taking it seriously is bad faith. Bad faith is vandalism. Smoke a pole. --Sonny Corleone DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n 06:21, 8 June 2010 (BST)
It's okay to need help with big boy things, but I fully expect you to be able to wipe your own ass unaided eventually and I don't want to take the chance away from you, hence my good faith attempt to help you gain what you constantly yearn for. Strength is just an accident arising from the weakness of others 06:23, 8 June 2010 (BST)
User still does not meet criteria and as per Woot precedent you're guilty. Also, if you think mothers approve of my type of naughty language then I'm sorry for the house you grew up in. Maybe the abusive relationship with your parents is the reason why you're gay. --Sonny Corleone DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n 06:27, 8 June 2010 (BST)
"If a user is highly exemplary in one criterion, a certain level of give may be extended to other criteria." Your obvious hard-on for fixing this wiki is as exemplary as its inherent limitations allow, which I felt would far overcome a simple lack of hard numbers in edit counts, which I fully expected you to catch up on should you have been promoted. Maybe if you could succeed at anything at all in your life, you should start with basic comprehension. It works for the rest of us. Strength is just an accident arising from the weakness of others 06:31, 8 June 2010 (BST)
As per the Woot precedent he has shown to be highly exemplary in one criterion but was still banned. A precedent is a precedent. I'm sorry that you like to pick and choose what you follow. Maybe if you worked on this you wouldn't be such a complete and utter screw up. --Sonny Corleone DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n 06:35, 8 June 2010 (BST)
Maybe your eyes are too watered up to read but it's already been pointed out to you that this doesn't follow any precedent from woot's cases, and there's been nine examples shown to you to back it up as not vandalism. Nine is still in finger-counting range so you shouldn't have that much trouble getting there. Strength is just an accident arising from the weakness of others 06:37, 8 June 2010 (BST)
Boring argument filled with untruths is boring. Contrary to what you said, not only is that not his second bid (it was his fourth), he did not meet the criteria on either of those nominations (check his contributions). Also, those were not his first two nominations. In fact, you seem to have forgotten that he had a few others, so I've linked them here for you: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. He wasn't escalated for his first bid, but was rather escalated for his second (which came only a month later), third, and fifth bids, establishing a clear line of precedence. *yawn* —Aichon— 06:37, 8 June 2010 (BST)
As per boxy here he has had only 2 official promotions. This nomination was still in bad faith and should be removed. --Sonny Corleone DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n 06:45, 8 June 2010 (BST)
You know what Izzy did when this exact same thing happened (edit: twice)? He archived it himself. Cause he does stuff on this wiki? Learn to. It's not an ops job to wipe your arse for you, do it yourself. -- 06:50, 8 June 2010 (BST)
Playing dumb isn't going to get you anywhere ("As per boxy", lol...it's an admin archive). Those were the only two not removed as vandal edits. I've already provided links to his other three nominations, or you can check his vandal data if you don't trust my links. You've provided nothing new, and this is the exact same routine you tried last month. Do you have any new material? —Aichon— 06:55, 8 June 2010 (BST)

Not Vandalism - As Aichon.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 07:39, 8 June 2010 (BST)

Not vandalism - but make a habit of it, and this will change -- boxy talk • teh rulz 08:33 8 June 2010 (BST)

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.--Umbrella-White.pngThadeous OakleyUmbrella-White.png 20:38, 6 June 2010 (BST)

1, 2 --Umbrella-White.pngThadeous OakleyUmbrella-White.png 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. --Umbrella-White.pngThadeous OakleyUmbrella-White.png 23:02, 6 June 2010 (BST)

Vandalism. Argh. I used to like that guy. Strength is just an accident arising from the weakness of others 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 --Umbrella-White.pngThadeous OakleyUmbrella-White.png 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. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 17:10, 6 June 2010 (BST)
Done.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 17:15, 6 June 2010 (BST)

Godblast you motherfrench toasting hineyholes! Get your spicy pants together you respectable womanes and ban this spicy pantshead to Shewt.--GANG Giles Sednik CAPD 20:49, 7 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 RPMBG 06:06, 6 June 2010 (BST)

He has now blanked both the main and talk page. --VVV RPMBG 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 DoomM! Fear is only as deep as the mind will allow it be.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 DoomM! Fear is only as deep as the mind will allow it be.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. --Umbrella-White.pngThadeous OakleyUmbrella-White.png 19:36, 2 June 2010 (BST)
I'll tell you what, how about a year? --RosslessnessWant 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. --Umbrella-White.pngThadeous OakleyUmbrella-White.png 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. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 21:23, 5 June 2010 (BST)

Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning/Archive/2010_06&oldid=1723284"