From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Protections Archive

2005 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2006 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2008 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2009 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2011 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2012 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Q3 Q4
2013 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Years 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration Guidelines

If you scroll to the bottom of the page you will find an Arbitration Issues and Censorship section. They abound with grammatical and spelling errors. I did a rewrite in in my sandbox. Can you do a copy paste job to fix the arbitration guideline? --GANG Giles Sednik CAPD 05:43, 29 June 2009 (BST)

Done, and thanks for fixing that. Linkthewindow  Talk  05:51, 29 June 2009 (BST)

User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig

  AHLGTH   < s h a r t a k

Shameless advertisement. Shartak's population has dropped over 35% in recent times, and since I'm so damed popular for some reason, it's going in my signature. Aren't you glad you people haven't banned templated signatures, because I'm not going to give this one a shave. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 03:27, 23 June 2009 (BST)

Ah whatever, you goose. Done. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 03:32, 23 June 2009 (BST)


I moved the content to UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Amazing vs Various, which was the original case created by amazing. Category:Wikigate should now simply state what the category is about.

[[Category:Arbitration Cases|Wikigate]]
This is a category for [[UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration|arbitration cases]] surrounding the event named 
[[Wikigate]]. The original case involved several users with several accusations (see 
[[UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Amazing vs Various|Amazing vs Various]]), and was later split in several 
1-against-1 cases involving amazing and those whom he accused in the original arbitration case.

This makes it easier for new people to understand the case, and wtf Wikigate was --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 14:13, 18 June 2009 (BST)

Usually I'd like to wait for the older users to do stuff like this (cause I wasn't around at the time) but I've fulfilled this request. I did leave in the summaries of the results of the separate cases in Category:Wikigate page, I think that is a helpful tool considering how the category is currently the portal that is linked from the arbitration archives. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 16:54, 18 June 2009 (BST)
Goood idea. But why did you redirected the talk page to the various case ? It would be nnice to leave the category talk page as a space for users to ask questions or comment about the case. --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 17:09, 18 June 2009 (BST)
I figured it would be protected as part of its role as an arbitration archive, but you're idea is fair, throw up a greeting on it, welcoming questions about wikigate? I'm about to go to bed now so I'll do it tomorrow morning if you don't. As for the bottom link, I'll fix the link and SD it tomorow. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 17:22, 18 June 2009 (BST)

UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Wikigate... protected or delete. Your choice. --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 17:18, 18 June 2009 (BST)

Category talk:Historical Events/Archive1

Archive, all votes are closed. Linkthewindow  Talk  10:38, 14 June 2009 (BST)

Sorry for keeping you waiting for so long. Done. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 16:54, 18 June 2009 (BST)


Guidelines should not be editable by normal users whenever they feel like.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 20:38, 8 June 2009 (BST)

I also request the official protection of this page. I've protected the page for the moment to prevent hag's continued, unconsented and undiscussed edits.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 20:56, 8 June 2009 (BST)

Now, the changes made before protection of the intro were to make sure they were as described as always. The changes to the guidelines page were to add in the clause that if no arbitrator is agreed on, one will be chosen and to remove the bit that said that arbitration is not required in any way. As far as I know, there has been no discussion for any of the changes Hagnat is trying to make, or that Iscariot has made, or anything. And I further state that guidelines should not be editable by normal users. It's something we use a rulebook, no one would be able to modify it without discussion or consensus.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 20:58, 8 June 2009 (BST)

Gee... ima glad i move the guidelines to a different page then, so you can protected it and forbid normal users to edit it. Pff. Btw, the arbitration guidelines you are trying to protect were written by OddStart and/or LibrarianBrent in 2005 without community input. --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 21:02, 8 June 2009 (BST)
And since then they have become a rule book for us, like many documents. You don't change something 3 years after you start using it and not expect slight problems to arise.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 21:04, 8 June 2009 (BST)

And I've now protected that guideline page to keep hag's from messing with it.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 21:07, 8 June 2009 (BST)

I should misconbitrate you for protecting a page where you have some vested interest :D but meh. --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 21:09, 8 June 2009 (BST)
I should take you to A/VB for modifying things we use as a rulebook without consensus. But you're an old dinosaur with the wikis best interest at heart, so I don't. You know we have a system of doing things, use it. :) --Mr. Angel, Help needed? 21:10, 8 June 2009 (BST)

The pages have been unprotected, and I still request another sysops to protect them. Prevention of Misconduct cases, etc. And I also request that the edits I have made prior to protection stay, because as I said there has been no discussion to justify Iscariot's and Hagnat's edits. And also, it'd be silly to have another confliction, one page saying ti can't be force with the main arbies page saying it can.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 01:42, 9 June 2009 (BST)--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 01:42, 9 June 2009 (BST)

(same for UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Intro) DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 04:47, 9 June 2009 (BST)

The Brookes Arms

6 days of back and forth editing, 27 revisions and to almost no effect. User:El Payaso Malo has contacted User:Von Carstein, so hopefully they'll work something out or else arby it. In the meantime, requesting protection. -- User:The Rooster RoosterDragon User talk:The Rooster 16:01, 8 June 2009 (BST)

Done, let me know when it clears off to unprotect it.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 16:26, 8 June 2009 (BST)


Paste the code in User:The Rooster/Sandpit/2 over it, verbatim. This version shaves the inclusion down nicely, makes Template:BuildingStatusDisambig redundant, adds a category and also cures cancer in its spare time. -- User:The Rooster RoosterDragon User talk:The Rooster 23:55, 4 June 2009 (BST)

durn.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 23:58, 4 June 2009 (BST)


The great clan of /zom/ has returned. As such it would be awfully nice if you could unprotect the page chaps. Conbar 18:45, 3 June 2009 (BST)

Using the Shambling Seagulls precedent, I've moved the current page to Zom/historical and unprotected the current one, removed the historical template, and updated your member count. Also - don't forget to make a header. Linkthewindow  Talk  12:35, 4 June 2009 (BST)


Under "Rules for Discussions". Change

The [[Talk:Suggestions|Suggestions talk page]] can be used to workshop possible suggestions before they are submitted.


[[Developing Suggestions]] can be used to workshop possible suggestions before they are submitted.

-- User:The Rooster RoosterDragon User talk:The Rooster 16:55, 2 June 2009 (BST)