UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Axe Hack vs Krazyxman
User:Axe Hack vs User:Krazyxman
Krazyxman has been adding POV speculation onto the Piñata page, claiming himself as the undisputed record holder for the most piñatas ever created. As this is just speculation, and I don't really care whether he does hold the most piñatas or not, a personal record is not really something that should be on the actual page itself. This record has been removed from the page numerous times, and he has been left a memo on his talk page about it. What I am hoping to acquire out of this Arbitration case is whether or not Krazyxman's record should be allowed a spot on the piñata page or not. On the account that it is something that should not be on the page, I request that Krazyxman refrain from re-adding his record onto the page.
Users I will not accept as Arbitrators include:
- User:Spiderzed
- User:Gordon
- User:Boxy
- User:DanceDanceRevolution
- User:Karek
- User:Shortround
- User:Armpit Odor
I am not accepting the above users to arbitrate because they too have removed Krazyxman's record before, and the validity of their neutralness are in question.
Also, I request that this case be handled and reviewed by a panel of no less than three (3) arbitrators, and no more than five (5) arbitrators. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 21:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
I'll do it.--User:Sexualharrison23:13, 24 February 2012 (bst)
- Me, too! --Bad Attitude Kirsty K.C. R&D d.b.a. Org XIII 23:47, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
I think this is a great case for arbitration and I offer to arbitrate. ~ 02:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- Let's face it. This is the most straight forward case this wiki has seen in years. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 02:15, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- It fits the classic eidt conflict type of dispute that arbitration was meant to solve. As straight forward as it may seem, I'll be a completely unbiased arbitor. Is it really necessary to have an arbitration panel? It would be handled much more smoothly I think if both parties agree to a single person. ~ 02:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- I trust the two arbitrators you have to work with, if Krazyxman accepts you, will be able to discuss this case to the fullest extent and come to an agreement both parties can agree upon. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 03:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- Yet in your previous statement you said you consider this to be the most straightforward case in recent years. I'm not as concerned about the colaboration efforts needed for what you're suggesting as I am the need to go through lengthy arbitrator choosing process. Again, I ask is it really neccessary or will you agree to a single arbitrator? ~ 03:31, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- I will accept a single arbitrator only if most users who offer to arbitrate isn't exactly the ideal arbitrator for this case (Sorry, Kirsty and Harrison. As much as I'd love for you two to arbitrate, I just don't think neither of you is the ideal arbitrator for this type of case). --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 03:43, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- Yet in your previous statement you said you consider this to be the most straightforward case in recent years. I'm not as concerned about the colaboration efforts needed for what you're suggesting as I am the need to go through lengthy arbitrator choosing process. Again, I ask is it really neccessary or will you agree to a single arbitrator? ~ 03:31, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- I trust the two arbitrators you have to work with, if Krazyxman accepts you, will be able to discuss this case to the fullest extent and come to an agreement both parties can agree upon. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 03:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- It fits the classic eidt conflict type of dispute that arbitration was meant to solve. As straight forward as it may seem, I'll be a completely unbiased arbitor. Is it really necessary to have an arbitration panel? It would be handled much more smoothly I think if both parties agree to a single person. ~ 02:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Inb4 Ross arbitrates. Also, I'd like to register my anger at the flagrant and outrageous violation of my beautiful red link and the creation of my user page by Krazyxman.--Shortround 10:49, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- i think you should start a vandal case against him in defense of your red ink!! MOAR RED TAPE!--User:Sexualharrison15:08, 25 February 2012 (bst)
- Offers --Rosslessness 15:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- Here is the deal. It is not speculation because I have solid proof by means of screenshots for each one I am claiming. If I were claiming on the wiki page that I have over 50 pinatas (which I do) then it would be speculation because I have no proof. I displayed as you can see on the discussion page long ago the post regarding my pinatas and have been doing this for a long time since I have been playing the game. I am always honest about everything I do. The reason I decided to put my pinatas on the page is because of the PERSONAL Red Rum statistic that is located on the additional information section already. If you want to say that no personal information is allowed in the official wiki then that should include personal guild/clan information as well. If that is the case and both my own and the Red Rum statistic were removed, then I would agree with the arbitration decision (if that is indeed the decision). To keep one form of "speculation" and not the other though is ridiculous at best. If I have made some mistakes on this wiki at all it is because I am new to using this, but that does not mean I can not contribute if I learn and implement things properly. I don't even know how the arbitration process works to be honest so whoever is going to decide can read this and decide, but I think my point makes perfect sense. You either have personal "speculative" statistics or you don't. Very simple. If someone were to provide proof of more pinatas I would gladly remove my addition. --KRaZyXmAn 22:48, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- You're wrong. At least in any claims of equivalence or relevance. Red Rum's portion is on there because it's relevant to the history of pinatas strategic use, you claim to being the top pinata'er is just self promotion. You've also had this removed an ungodly amount of times now by a massive number of people and should, at this point, just be grateful you're not getting A/VB escalations since it's more or less clear that it's been made as clear as possible that what you're adding does not belong on the page. Very simple.--Karekmaps 2.0?! 14:04, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- Here is the deal. It is not speculation because I have solid proof by means of screenshots for each one I am claiming. If I were claiming on the wiki page that I have over 50 pinatas (which I do) then it would be speculation because I have no proof. I displayed as you can see on the discussion page long ago the post regarding my pinatas and have been doing this for a long time since I have been playing the game. I am always honest about everything I do. The reason I decided to put my pinatas on the page is because of the PERSONAL Red Rum statistic that is located on the additional information section already. If you want to say that no personal information is allowed in the official wiki then that should include personal guild/clan information as well. If that is the case and both my own and the Red Rum statistic were removed, then I would agree with the arbitration decision (if that is indeed the decision). To keep one form of "speculation" and not the other though is ridiculous at best. If I have made some mistakes on this wiki at all it is because I am new to using this, but that does not mean I can not contribute if I learn and implement things properly. I don't even know how the arbitration process works to be honest so whoever is going to decide can read this and decide, but I think my point makes perfect sense. You either have personal "speculative" statistics or you don't. Very simple. If someone were to provide proof of more pinatas I would gladly remove my addition. --KRaZyXmAn 22:48, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
OBJECTION! | |
This user has an objection. |
This case is over before we could even agree on an Arbitrator! Your simple solution, I will settle for. You want evidence someone has more than 18 documented piñatas? Fine, I'll show you some evidence. TAKE THIS! --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 23:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think this will help things considering he thinks the only reason he can't have his comment on there is verifiability apparently. It's not, his problem is relevance, which it completely lacks. Even if he does have a gajillion more than everyone else(and at 50 I guarantee he doesn't) it's not informative to the history or nature of this action. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 14:04, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- ^Yup. And as soon as KrazyXman documents more pinatas than anyone else on the wiki, he'll be back. There's middle ground here if arbitration is allowed to go forward. ~ 17:27, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- ...Are there any other details you guys are gonna give out that I purposely left unsaid in hopes of using it as a trump card should the case go forward? -_- --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 17:30, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- Not I. As I said, I will be impartial. ~ 17:43, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- I dunno, check my revision history for that page and comments on I think it was Boxy's talk. That's about all really. :D --Karekmaps 2.0?! 08:14, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- ...Are there any other details you guys are gonna give out that I purposely left unsaid in hopes of using it as a trump card should the case go forward? -_- --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 17:30, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- ^Yup. And as soon as KrazyXman documents more pinatas than anyone else on the wiki, he'll be back. There's middle ground here if arbitration is allowed to go forward. ~ 17:27, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
I will argue case for Axe Hack too DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 02:45, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
A pinata can't be made by one person fucktard. Unless you got infected but not killed 18 times. Generaloberst 11:02, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
- Who is to say that isn't exactly what he did. After all, there's eighteen screenshots of Krazy making pinatas by himself on his user page. Who's fucktarded now? ~ 02:40, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
I withdraw my offer to arbitrate and instead I offer to represent Krazyxman in his absense. I'll message him and ask if he's ok with that but if he doesn't respond within a couple of days, I reccomend that a sysop appoint me one anyone else willing to do it so we can move forward. ~ 14:56, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
- If he doesn't respond it's consent by silence to the edit. The arbitration gets dropped and his edit gets undone, we don't involve people in these cases against their will. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 08:42, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- Here here! Now let's close this and remove it from our wiki, as a blemish from the face of a child.--Shortround }.{ My Contributions 11:10, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Let's just call this one done. The Pinata page is undergoing much needed changes and Krazy's points are being addressed. Pretty much a non-issue now. ~ 01:55, 19 March 2012 (UTC)