UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2006 12

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
	2020

Vandalism Report Space

Poopman9

Edited my Archive despite the words in bold at the top of my Archive stating not to edit it. --Slice 'N' Dicin' Axe Hack 21:53, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

This is not a ruling. While I find this behavior extremely stupid, I don't think this is a bannable thingie. Any other thoughts on this matter?--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 22:40, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Not sure if I'm allowed to have an opinion on this, but since the Archive is a subpage of the main user page and not the talk page, I would say Poopman is not allowed to edit it, nor is anyone but Axe Hack. Just my interpretation though. --_Vic D'Amato__Dead vs Blue_ 22:45, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Need I point you to the bold words at the top of my archive? --Slice 'N' Dicin' Axe Hack 22:54, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I think you're being a bit unrealistic, archiving a running discussion without giving him a reasonable chance to respond. He replied less than 3 days after the last posts by you and Xoid, it's just that you'd rushed it off to the archives in the meantime -- boxy ^{T L PA DA} 23:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Personaly I would say that although it is bad taste that Axe Hack archived it while in discussion, Poopman could have easily just coppied it out of the archive and placed it back onto the talk page. And by the user page policy it is vandalism if Axe Hack wants to say that he didn't want it changed. If not that means that anyone can change anyone elses use page and pages under their name space. Well thats my 2 cents. - Jedaz^{ΣT ΞD GIS S!} 01:17, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Banned for 1 month--Gage 03:03, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm with Boxy on this one. Don't archive it unless he's had at least a week to respond.--J Muller 00:42, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

While I agree with you that it's not exactly 'nice' to do so, he is well within his rights to archive it early. That's another section of the rules that need an overhaul. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 00:05, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Zombielord 2

Constantly edits on the main userpage of Zombie Spray, as can be seen in his contributions. Perform a checkuser and if they happen to be the same person just give him a couple tips (or just tell me and I'll do it). --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 06:29, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Same person. Matthew, don't tell us what to do, okay?--Gage 06:44, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Me and Zombielord 2 are different people I introduced him to urban dead and created his account for him and was on the same computer as I used his been using wiki from his on computer lately--Zombie Spray ♥ 07:36, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Er... Can anyone decipher that? Cyberbob Talk 07:37, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

He made an account for his friend on his own computer, and that's why Checkuser shows both of them with the same IP. That's what he said on User talk:Zombielord 2. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 07:42, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

yes A+ for you Matthew farenheit--Zombie Spray ♥ 07:51, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see now. Sorry for the confusion.--Gage 08:01, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

thankyou for understanding--Zombie Spray ♥ 08:07, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Jonathan

Although most of his edits to this page were done in good faith, he completly removed a whole section of the page (see difference) and left a note on the talk page with a really pathetic excuse for vandalism. --Teksura^Talk 03:29, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I dont think this is vandalism, so I wouldnt warn Jonathan. He was clearly acting in good faith while editing this page, and he only removed a section which he disagreed on. Poor form? yes. Vandalism? Dun think so. Now that you added the content back to the page, try to discuss this with Jon and explain to him why this should be kept. Anyway, other mod might thing otherwise, so i will hold this for a second opinion. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 03:45, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Warned--Gage 04:30, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Yourmom

Multiple cases of straight vandalism + alt vandalism + impersonation. See case below and his contributions to The Black Knights page. --Brizth ^{M T} 14:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I admit that after reveiwing what is actually considered vandalism that yes i did so do. but on my behalf i would like to say that i thought that i was doing a favor by taking out an old message for the black knights as i am a very big fan of revivalofthefittest but i don't see why i am being accused of using an alt. The computer i am using is a public library computer because i don't have one of my own. Having realized i did in fact commit vandalism ,albeit without being fully aware of what constitute's vandalism, i really think that is was minor and truely harmless. i would like to say that when i signed on as a new user i had no idea that there were rules to editing the pages. EX if you look below the edit screen it says "Please note that all contributions to The Urban Dead Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then don't submit it here. You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Project:Copyrights for details). DO NOT SUBMIT COPYRIGHTED WORK WITHOUT PERMISSION!"

Nowhere did i see any indication for vandalism and while i admit that there may have been a screen when i signed up with this username i probably just checked the box and moved forward because more often than not when you sign up for account the I Agree checkboxes and safeguards just give my signature that i will not sue the owner of the sight or anyone else liable in a court of law. so without further ado i appoligize for my minor acts of vandalism and pledge that I will refrain from such acts in the future.(i recognize that this should be on the talk page but i don't know how to move it there.)signed --Yourmom 18:55, 22 December 2006 (UTC) PS. it would be nice it user's were notified on their talk pages instead of having to find these things out on their own.

Warned.--Gage 00:30, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Vidad12 vs. Vldad12

I think you guys should review the treatment of Vidad12 and Skowt and Vldad12, I have a feeling that at least Vldad12 should get the heave ho, even if Vidad12 isn't cleared (which it looks to me as if he should). I've left my thoughts in the relevant sections -- boxy ^{T L PA DA} 12:24, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll answer here instead of the relevant sections to keep everything in one place.

Vidad12 unbanned. He was the one who created The Black Knights page, not vandalise it.
Vldad12 permabanned, alt of Yourmom (Checkuser), quite obvious attempted impersonation of Vidad12 + lots of vandalism. See case above.
Skowt is a vandal, probably alt of someone, impossible to tell whose, stays banned.

--Brizth ^{M T} 14:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

This thing is confusing as hell, as Vidad12, he who created the page, is also the one who blanked it... -Certified=Insane^☭

16:57, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

True, but that's his (their) right. It is, after all, their page. Thus I also reverted your revert. --Brizth ^{M T} 17:07, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Confusing... Well, whatever, I'll let you handle it... -.^ -Certified=Insane^☭

18:19, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Brian mercat

Vandalized someone else's User page. --_Vic D'Amato__Dead vs Blue_ 03:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

...which isn't the userpage of a user that actually exists. This is a criterion 9 Vic. Look before you leap.--Gage 03:27, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't these cases still be treated as vandalism? They're just clogging the namespace for real users. --_Vic D'Amato__Dead vs Blue_ 03:30, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

No... they should be moved to the appropriate spots and the redirects deleted. Cyberbob Talk 04:01, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

General Abizaid

Removing comments from middle of conversations. --Brizth ^{M T} 18:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Warned.--Gage 19:07, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Miscellaneous crap moved to talk page. If you aren't a mod or the accused, and you don't have something productive to say, please don't waste my time by posting here. Case Closed--Gage 01:27, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk here!!--Gage 02:30, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Experiment IV

Warned for this edit. It seems from his edits that he is a member of shacknews and is bitter that Rotticus doesn't think they are historical. Boo. Hoo.--Gage 05:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

General Abizaid

Repeatedly removed discussions from the Giddings Mall talk page because he wasnt winning. --Grim s-^{Mod U!} 00:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

you know what, i'll make you a deal. you get my name off of this list and everything I've done in fourm and i'll stop posting and leave this wiki. It's to strict anyway. Deal or no deal? general abizaid—The preceding unsigned comment was added by General Abizaid (talk • contribs) .

Warned--Gage 02:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Look all I ask is that I'm takin off this stupit list and any post on this wiki mention me is delated and I'll never post again or log in with this fourm ID. I'll just use the wiki as for map or current suburb reports. I'm the kind of person who dosn't like to be on a stupit bad list and want it erased. General Abizaid—The preceding unsigned comment was added by General Abizaid (talk • contribs) .

Look, I am not going to argue with you. If you don't want to be on the "stupid or bad list" then don't do stupid or bad things.--Gage 02:39, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Never mind. I don't care as I'm done with this wiki and the game. Its to slow pace and the wiki has grown boring. I don't care about the stupit list or having an account on here anymore . You people stink, i didn't do anything but no matter. Goodbye—The preceding unsigned comment was added by General Abizaid (talk • contribs) .

You're welcome, I'm sure... Cyberbob Talk 02:45, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

mmmkay... that was weid... anyway, adieu friend... you shall not be missed --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 02:49, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Why you restore my comments. I have to right to delete my own comments, I didn't mess with any other persons comment. I don't care what you say there mine comments i wrote and I want them gone. I'll keep deltteing them till there gone. General Abizaid

And I'm sure you'll be banned for circumventing moderations--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 20:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Jesus H. Christ

One-off I created to make a joke on the Historical Groups page (look under Gage's comment on indenting). Ban it for however long you like, I'm just bringing it to your attention voluntarily.--J Muller 07:04, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Considering this account seems to be you, I am baffled here.--Gage 07:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I created it so it would look smooth when I made the joke. The idea of Jesus having an UD Wiki account made me laugh. Seriously, go nuts with it, the joke's been made.--J Muller 07:17, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

If this is a joke, I don't get it. All I could think of was Godmazing. I am going to let another mod decide what to do with you.--Gage 07:24, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, everyone's going to think I'm a retard now that someone wiped the joke I used this account for on Historical Groups. For anyone who didn't come in time to catch it, Gage said "JESUS CHRIST LEARN TO INDENT" and I was hit, in a moment of boredom, with the inspiration to make this account and refute his assertion that Jesus needs to learn to indent. I don't know, it's late where I am and it made me laugh.--J Muller 07:27, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Jesus Christ, I put it back. You can keep the account, seeing it was a joke. Gah, I can be thick sometimes :D--Gage 07:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, seriously? I thought you got it and just thought I was a total moron. It's okay, Gage, happens to everyone.--J Muller 07:33, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

so are we or are we or are we not allowed to have alt accounts? I saw a policy that has NOT been passed about it so I assume it is still within the rules to do whatever you want with alts except to evade bans and to vote/sugjest. Cat go meow 00:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Go away, 3page. Cyberbob Talk 02:22, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Considering that I wasn't here for your first ban, and that you continue to use alts to circumvent it, I would say that in your case the answer is no.--J Muller 06:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

whos 3page? I have a valid question that I was curious about (to see if I can use alts for annonimity reasons), and I suddenly get bombarded with accusations. Obviously alts aren't allowed to circumvent bans, I wanted to know if they are allowed for personal reasons as long as you don't break the rules for a normal account (ie I assume both accounts would be treated as the same account?) Cat go meow 20:45, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Pziko

Vandalised the Zerg Hunters Unlimited page--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 00:49, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Warned.--Gage 00:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I very much doubt this was bad faith. It's far more likely that this was just ignorance. This guy's a newbie, only been here for 5 edits, and he left a message for the Zerg hunters on their group page instead of their talk page. Could you take back the warning? --Toejam 01:13, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Gage

[1] Reverted legitimate vandalism report. Rasher 21:35, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Reverting your vandalism is not vandalism. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 21:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Rasher

More shit from Rasher--Gage 21:27, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Benevolent more like MALevolent! SEE WHAT I DID THERERasher 21:34, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm just checking what the appropriate ban incrementation is.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 21:35, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Rasher, stop wasting our time. Banned for one week. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 21:35, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

We will throw in this edit and, of course, this one, and make it a week long ban on precedent and the fact that no other mods seem to be on to stop this shit. Actually Xoid, I got him :P--Gage 21:39, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I was trying to but Rasher, you, and The General all edit conflicted me. Jerks. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 21:44, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Rayvern

Removed a fair and polite query from a rival group from his groups talk page. Offending Edit

We have established in the past, most notably with the cases regarding the BME, that such arbitrary removal of comments on a group talk page, especially for the purpose of hiding damaging information is against the spirit of the rules (Indeed, it did result in the case to which i refer in a rather long Vandal log for Legend X, their leader). --Grim s-^{Mod U!} 14:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Warned. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 15:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

AOR

Edited the description of the UD logo to "Your mom". --_Vic D'Amato__Dead vs Blue_ 04:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

This may be one of those tests that wikipedia is always talking about. I would just set it back, and ask him not to do it again.--Gage 05:00, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean by tests, but I reverted it. --_Vic D'Amato__Dead vs Blue_ 05:02, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

New User Tests--Gage 05:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Taco man

Same usual thing from Taco man, creating stupid crap that has no relevance to the wiki.

--_Vic D'Amato__Dead vs Blue_ 23:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

First two were from over a week ago, with the second already brought up on this page. Third looks like his own group page, and the forth is, while stupid, not vandalism.--Gage 23:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Rueful

Same shit we have all come to know from Rueful--Gage 20:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I would say give him his second ban, but i'd like a second opinion on this, as I don't want to be hauled into M/M.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 20:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Did it before I reloaded and saw your edit. Seems like definite vandalism to me, though I didn't check if he ought to have lost his warnings under the new system.--'STER-Talk-Mod^P! 20:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Crap moved to talk page. This is not the discussion page guys. Keep it short, and if you don't have evidence for the case, keep your mouth shut.--Gage 02:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Are you just another Amazing account or do we have some new self righteous idiot to waste everyone's time? Rasher 19:26, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Darkmagic

Edited another users comments. --Max Grivas ^{JG / M.F.T.} 16:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Warned for the 2nd time.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 16:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Oops, that was the same case. Sorry for the confusion. I just found it as it was not previously reverted. Should not be a second warning. --Max Grivas ^{JG / M.F.T.} 16:38, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, fixed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The General (talk • contribs) .

Blackzilla1

Edited another user's user page. --_Vic D'Amato__Dead vs Blue_ 01:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

VVarned.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 02:38, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

whatthe

Whoa, this is unexpected! Vandal blocked!--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 21:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure you forgot to block the ip address. which if you forgot is 63.172.63.145.

63.172.63.145 yeah 21:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

and to bann that other guy that I was reverting, wanker his name was. 63.172.63.145 yeah 21:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

An extremely pissed of user

Proxy shielded vandal. Kevan permabanned him.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 20:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Undeadkiller

Deleted most of text on a page --JohnRubin 12:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Warned. Cyberbob Talk 12:26, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Duce Bigalow

Edited another user's user page (proof), but it doesn't look like this user actually exists. Warning and delete the page? --_Vic D'Amato__Dead vs Blue_ 06:09, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

It's most likely an alt of his, making it a crit9. Cyberbob Talk 06:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Blik

I don't know if this is exactly worthy of a ban, but mabye a warning. Edited (and basically vandalized) Axe27's userpage. I think Blik's just new and has no idea what he's doing. I did notice the Welcome Newbie template on his page, but he needs to be taught he can't just randomly edit crap. --Joe O'Wood TALK CONTRIBS UD 18:41, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Warned. --Brizth ^{M T} 19:44, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

The General

Edited a comment of his after it had been replied to. Cyberbob Talk 12:12, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

since when was this vandalism? Anyway, I was helping you, by removing a comment that could have made termie refuse you as arbitrator. It was good faith.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 12:13, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

It also counts as impersonation. Cyberbob Talk 12:46, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

By changing what you've said after you've replied to it, you are essentially forcing words into people's mouths. If you had've gotten into contact with Cyberbob first, and set it up correctly so that it didn't end up making his comments look stupid, then fine. You didn't. I'd prefer to be warning you for something actually important, but editing comments after someone's replied to them is a no-no, and you've known it for some time. Warned –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 14:22, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I haven't known it for some time, that rule was not there when I originally learnt the rules. Do I know have to reread the rules every day to check what stupid new thing I can't do?--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 14:47, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Since that rule has been in place for longer than I've been here... it's not much to ask. Cyberbob Talk 14:51, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't ever remember this rule saying we can't edit our comments. Anyway, it's still good faith.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 15:52, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

You were around, you're a moderator and you've certainly seen this tired old scene go down before. I'm not convinced you didn't know. More likely an instance of "you didn't care". Besides which, ignorance ≠ innocence. Commonsense dictates that you do not modify your written word's intent or meaning after someone has replied to it. You're doing both them, and yourself, a disservice. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 16:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

How was trying to prevent terminator from rejecting him a diservice?--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 16:28, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Several people were already warned for that general, you should've known better since you have been around here longer than those who warned you. Shame on thee, general. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 03:03, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Do you think Terminator is not going to notice Cyberbob's comment, realise something is now missing and go back and look for himself? I don't think highly of the guy, but he's not that stupid. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 07:55, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Darkmagic

Impersonation. --Barbecue Barbecue 02:23, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

i will not alow myself to be called a pker, and a known pker without proof.--Darkmagic 02:58, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I can completely appreciate that, but my understanding is that you either need to wipe out the comment completely, rather than just edit it, or add your own separate comment contesting the claim. --Barbecue Barbecue 03:05, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

i'v ran out of patience with that one, i am tired of people calling me a pker with no proof and i am gonna do anything to stop it, anything. and that wouldnt help, they wont listen--Darkmagic 03:07, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

You do not edit another user's comments, period, capisce? Warned. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 04:45, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't appriciate getting my comments edited. I have free speech to an extent on this wiki, and I was certainly not out of line.--Dickhole Bonaparte _{Leader, Malton Rangers} 21:35, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Phil McKrackin

Proof user was using some very obscene language on our page as if revival actually edited it but truth is he can't. I appologize for whining if you think i am about this one but i think it might warrant some attention if you click on the previous hyperlink you will see what he posted. i have already deleted the content but would like to request he get banned or at least warned but trouble is the used signed vidad12 which as you well know is a banned user just scroll down.--Yourmom 15:27, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

CheckUser confirms that Phil McKrackin = Vidad12, so he's down for the count. Note - coarse language is not a punishable offence. The only reason he's being banned is for making an alt account, not for his language (which is really very mild, anyway...). Cyberbob Talk 15:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Damn, you just edit conflicted me while I was typing exactly the same thing!--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 15:41, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

TheUncleBob

Wiped the Angels of Mercy page after a fight on their talk page -- boxy ^{T L PA DA} 01:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Warned--Gage 01:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Please see talk page for comments on this. TheUncleBob 01:46, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Vidad12 and Skowt

Actually, I am quite confused about Vidad12 now that I looked at his contribs... I really don't know what to make of it. Skowt, however, I have very little doubts about. -Certified=Insane^☭

23:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Both permabanned..--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 23:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I have a suspicion (on what I've seen, no IP data) that you've got the wrong guy here The General. Vidad12 did wipe the Black Knights page, but only to get rid of the vandalism (it's a spree, keep clicking on next diff, eg.) of Vldad12 (who was imping him). There has been persistant vandalism of that page -- boxy ^{T L PA DA} 12:10, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Sindy Saint

Impersonation. Cyberbob Talk 04:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Warned.--Gage 04:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

On a side note, I was wondering if she has the right to just delete your stuff like that. But then again, it IS her talk page... I was just wondering. --RedShadowHero 02:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

You can delete pretty much anything off your talk page.--Gage 02:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, just wanted to know --RedShadowHero 02:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

taco man

Editing a group page. Someone should explain him what talk pages are.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 00:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a job for you, and not for M/VB. Hop to it Thari!--Gage 00:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

CGR

His top few contirbutions (at least) seem to be nothing my page wiping, eg Creedy Defence Force -- boxy ^{T L PA DA} 01:23, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Banned. Cyberbob Talk 01:38, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

This guy is nothing more than a two bit vandal. I am making it permanent.--Gage 01:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

nvm, Cyberbob got him--Gage 01:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Actaully, CGR = CRF, so I banned the IP--Gage 02:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Sindy Saint

How about editing the Regulators Alliance talk page, because she didn't want to listen to what others had to say? Is that against the rules? --RedShadowHero 23:23, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

That should be a separate report (in fact it is, so the original report is still outstanding), but I'll accept it. Warned. Cyberbob Talk 04:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Anachronos666

Impersonation.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 07:09, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Warned--Gage 07:12, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

It turns out that this was a technical error rather than anything in bad faith. Could you retract the warning? --Toejam 23:21, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

If it's not retracted already, I'll do it right now. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 09:19, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Appreciated. --Toejam 15:07, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Anachronos 22:00, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

TheDoc

He messed with a minor page here and here, and his only contribs are with that page. It's minor, dumb stuff, but still...--Lachryma 03:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Permabanned.--Gage 03:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Poopman9

Continual bad faith trolling of the suggestions page.

1
2
3
4
5

I know we tolerate a lot of the suggestions page, and that it isn't a nice place but this is ridiculous. {{GTIOFW}}--Gage 00:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Let's throw in this edit too.--Gage 01:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Banned for a week. Clear abuse of Spam votes, and his trolling is the icing on the cake. Cyberbob Talk 03:05, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

(Thankyou --Funt Solo

15:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC))

CRF

Vldad12

Questionable edits here and here. Not sure what this guy is trying to do but it doesn't look like good faith to me. -- ∀lan Watson ^T·RVP 03:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I myself have seen a huge number of edits to that page that seemed suspect. I don't know...--Gage 05:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I just stumbled upon this guy, seems to be nothing but vandalism or misdirection in his contributions. Here's a straight out vandalism of a userpage. And start from this edit and just work your way through via "next diff", a spree! This guy is also trying to imp Vidad12 who seems to be a legitimate member of the Black Knights -- boxy ^{T L PA DA} 11:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

The Envoy

Impersonation. Diff comparision. He's a first time offender, but he should be told not to do that, and how to fix crap like that up without breaking the rules (i.e., rewriting the entry, completely instead of editing someone else's signed comment). –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 15:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. However, I can only hope he reads your comment, because I really CBFed explaining it all to him... Cyberbob Talk 15:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Karloth vois

Karloth, in what essentially amounts to nothing more than using the wiki to sow confusion in the 'enemies' ranks, started a little edit war on the Red Rum page. Stars here and ends here, when Gage locked the page. Disrupting the wiki and carrying out an edit-war purely because you want to fuck with your in-game enemies' heads? I believe that falls under 'bad faith'. Darth Sensitive, Gage, Zaruthustra and possibly other members of Red Rum could confirm this. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 13:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism: looking at RR history, we can find 3 situations were Karl edits was reverted for vandalism... boy, i wish i could give him 3 warnings for that, but i will only be able to give him one. :( Strange that no one ever filled this case in here, since there was times in the past when people would be brought in here for a lot less than this. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 13:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

What Xoid said above is true. Given we are in contact, I would have preferred a personal warning in advance of bringing it here. Know that this was done with no serious intent whatsoever, and I accept whatever consequences it entails. --Karloth vois ^RR 23:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Not Vandalism I do not consider these edits in bad faith, just as I do not consider the multitude of threads that Karloth and I made about this ruse were in bad faith. This is an over-reaction in my opinion. I highly doubt that we're getting banned from the forums, even though what we did there was much more extreme. The wiki is not untouchable, nor is it so holy that using it to advance one's agenda is wrong, which is what he was doing; acting along with Sirens to advance our ruse. This controlled, orchestrated show is not grounds for banning. To that end, will you also put Sirens up for banning for 'using the wiki to sow confusion in the enemy ranks'? - Buncy 16:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Why does it matter? Karloth's fine with it, and that's what counts. Let them have their retarded little play-war. Cyberbob Talk 16:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm fine with it only so far as it avoids what is clearly not to be taken seriously being blown into yet more wiki-drama. It's been dramatised enough by bringing it here, and I'm attempting to rectify that by getting it over and done with as quickly as possible. I don't appreciate wording like retarded as it's blatantly going to stir up trouble. Cypher- drop it, it's not worth the time. Moderators- give me my warning and be done with it. --The Supreme Court ^RR 17:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

We have. This was supposed to have been finished with. Cyberbob Talk 06:21, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Hempress

Edited User:Porcelina. --Slice 'N' Dicin' Axe Hack 12:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Not vandalism, they're the same person. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 13:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry about that. Didn't realize I was logged in as Hempress at the time. I'm trying to keep the two users seperate for privacy. --Hempress 05:57, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Blue Command Vic

Moving other people's votes on the suggestions page. I believe that "Keep" placed in front of Labine's vote was sarcastic.--Gage 03:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

And we have confirmation--Gage 03:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I saw a Keep in the kill section, and moved it to where I thought it should be. Maybe he should be a little more obvious next time.--_Vic D'Amato__Dead vs Blue_ 03:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you should stop fucking with other peoples votes? There were sarcastic (I think) Spams in the Keep section today, did you fix those too?--Gage 03:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

No, those were already spaminated off the page before I got home from work to see them, so I have no idea what you're talking about. If anything, this is a case of good-faith gone wrong, not vandalism.--_Vic D'Amato__Dead vs Blue_ 03:12, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Don't do it again.--Gage 03:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Banned for 24 hours. Cyberbob Talk 05:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Wasn't it Gage who, hours after his promotion, proclaimed on this very page "we will endeavour to assume good faith"? (I apologise if I've paraphrased incorrectly.) This looks clearly like good faith gone awry. Is there a precedent for a second opinion from another mod? This seems too harsh. --Funt Solo

18:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I should add, normally I'd assume bad faith - but if people are going to place Keep on a kill or spam vote, then they're sort of to blame themselves for sowing confusion. In fact, Labine was breaking the rules as written, so if you're going to punish Blue Command Vic then surely you should also warn Labine? --Funt Solo

18:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

People's votes aren't up for interpretation.--Gage 18:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

You've changed your mind about the assuming good faith thing, then? Good to know. --Funt Solo

18:46, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

It's the heading it's placed under (Keep, Kill, Spam/Dupe) that counts, except for the Spam/Dupe heading where you need to specify what it's a dupe of for it to be a dupe (the vote will be assumed to be a spam vote otherwise). It's also incredibly obvious from Labine's vote as to his intent. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 18:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for providing a second opinion, anyway. --Funt Solo

19:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Mourg

Main of the vandal Lunklunk. Vandalism in question. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 16:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Warned. Cyberbob Talk 16:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

KamikazeRomantic

Edited User:Routliffe--Gage 05:53, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Warned.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 12:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Psycho Billy

Just before I banned him for 24 hours, he vandalised the ASS page. Banned for 48 hours, on top of his 24 hour one. That comes to a grand total of 72 hours. Cyberbob Talk 03:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, going over his edits, this guy hasn't made an edit that wasn't vandalism. I am laying on the permaban.--Gage 03:57, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

No argument here. Smackdownage FTW. Cyberbob Talk 04:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Caporegime

CheckUser shows that Caporegime = Psycho Billy, so Psycho's earned himself a 24 hour ban. Cyberbob Talk 03:00, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Psycho Billy

Edited Axe Hack's user page. Warned. Cyberbob Talk 02:55, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

poopman9

Created the flametastic page: Gage sucks EDIT - Apparently it was already deleted, but it was certainly in bad faith. --THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 01:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Not to mention threats on his user page--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 01:47, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

This guy makes me sick, but I will have to recuse myself from this decision.--Gage 01:50, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Clearly bad faith. Death threats & constant harassment are things we do not condone on this wiki. Banned for 48 hours. Cyberbob Talk 01:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Can we add making a joke of the promotional system to the mix?--Gage 02:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

We could, but it falls under the same umbrella of punishment - this report was made after that particular piece of jocularity was committed. Cyberbob Talk 02:39, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

The generaI

Impersonation?--Gage 04:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Lol, no, I just made it so noone else would impersonate me. The generaI 04:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I am going to need conformation from The General since your IP's don't match.--Gage 04:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

10 bucks says it's 3 page. Cyberbob Talk 05:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

That's the best you got? 50 bucks that this is an account made just for the Devil(3pwv duh!) and Gold Blade to spam the wiki with crap. --Axe Hack 05:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll see your 50, and raise you a hundred. 3page performed a similar stunt on the SW wiki. Cyberbob Talk 05:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

This account is a sham. It is tracing to a location half a world away from where The General actually lives. Unless his "library" is actually on another continent, this account is very much a fake. I am permabanning the account, and it will be undone if The General confirms the identity of the account.--Gage 05:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

That's not me. You can tell from the way he talks, anyway, i'd be using my real ip if I was just sitting on an account.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 21:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Minority reportie

Permabanned for vandalism of DORIS + proxy use.--Gage 03:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Drewflem1

I really think this may be a total ignorance of how to edit a wiki, but I'm not taking any chances. The edit in question disturbed the Lebende Tote ad which I fixed but it just catches me as odd... Conndraka^{mod TDHPD CFT} 02:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I think a link to the edit in question would be helpful in this instance. -- ∀lan Watson ^T·RPM 02:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Considering the fact that he only has one edit, I don't think it is too hard to find. I decree this guy a noob, but not a vandal. The offending recruitment add should probably be fixed or removed.--Gage 03:10, 30 November 2006 (UTC).

Hey guys, sorry if I'm not supposed to post here but this guy joined our group (BOW) and he posts on our message board. Long story short...I don't think he's malacious, just uninformed and highly energetic.--Migbatt 04:36, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2006 12

Vandalism Report Space

Vidad12 vs. Vldad12

Vidad12 and Skowt

Navigation menu

Search