UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2007 09: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 02:09, 10 December 2008

Slippy88

Multiple vandalisms- see [1] [2] [3] [4] I think that should suffice. Nalikill ^{TALK E! W! M! USAI} 22:24, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Permabanned as his only edits were vandalism of Bounty hunter x. --^T 22:24, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Winter Rose

Hasn't done anything yet, but by the comment given to me, it's clear its a sockpupper for izumi. Even said "don't tell my group to denounce me" and i'm asking em to denounce izumi. Sockpuppets are a ban.--Darkmagic 20:54, 30 September 2007 (BST)

~~Sockpuppets are a ban, yes... but unless checkuser comes up as an alt, he can't be banned.~~. Whoops, CNR his contributions. You're right, he's admitted, pretty much that he's an izumi alt. Nalikill ^{TALK E! W! M! USAI} 21:44, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Yep. I have. What are you going to do about it? Ban me? HA! Winter Rose 21:50, 30 September 2007 (BST)

No, but GRIM or BOXY will. Your temper really is your weakness, isn't it? If you chilled out... appealed to the sysops calmly... they might reconsider. As is, you ain't winning any friends. Nalikill ^{TALK E! W! M! USAI} 21:51, 30 September 2007 (BST)

As it stands, i recognize only the account "izumi morimoto" as leader"--Darkmagic 21:54, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Nali, I have appealed to the moderators AND Kevan himself multiple times. That was my first reaction to the ban. After getting nothing but the "You've made your bed now lie in it" line, I've decided to take matters into my own hands. No one can or will ever stop me from editing this wiki. That's that. Winter Rose 21:57, 30 September 2007 (BST)

If we had to we could find out from the real owners of the wikis, if we could do something. there are many ways to stop a proxy user, none are fun for the one who takes said punishment, and you'll run out of ips to hide behind sooner or later.--Darkmagic 22:03, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Yes, they can. And that was too close to the incident, and you didn't exactly approach humbly. I'm too lazy to find quotes, but you came with a "HOW DARE YOU" and an "I DIDN'T DESERVE THIS", not a "I fucked up massively, and I beg your forgiveness" attitude. Nalikill ^{TALK E! W! M! USAI} 22:03, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Actually, that is not the case. My appeal came over a week later through emails to the moderators, in which I apologized for my actions and promised to never edit wrongly again. They told me to get fucked. Winter Rose 22:05, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Izumi, i really wouldnt give a damn if you had stopped or had you not edited my page, and give proof --Darkmagic 22:07, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Permabanned as a confirmed alt of Izumi Orimoto. I should probably make a counter for Izumi alt bans. ;) --^T 22:15, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Would help when we asked a higher authority to remove her. maybe we should get kev to ban her ingame for zerging.--Darkmagic 22:17, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Bob Fortune

Continues to add some trolling to community pages.--Finis Valorum 20:37, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Get lost Finis. You think that's trolling, you should look at...oh I don't know...your userpage where you accuse people of zerging without any evidence. --Bob Fortune ^RR 20:40, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Beeep, wrong answer. Learn the difference between user space and main space.--Finis Valorum 20:41, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Ah...so you admit you're a troll? Anyhow, all I've posted is the truth. I don't see how that's any different to a zombie group posting something like "we broke in here and ate the brainz of harman sheep - BARHAH" on a Mall's page. --Bob Fortune ^RR 20:44, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Beep, wrong again. Insert a coin and try again.--Finis Valorum 20:47, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Vandalism - Seeing that both edits where made in community pages, and in bad faith towards finis. People, keep your grudges to your user and group pages, PLEASE. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 01:57, 1 October 2007 (BST)

Sexylegsread

Posted a humourous suggestion on the regular suggestions page in violation of suggestions rule 10: Suggestions created entirely for the purpose of satire, insult, or comedy are considered vandalism and treated appropriately by sysops. If you want to post a joke suggestion put it on the Humorous Page. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 15:32, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Discussion moved to talk page

Needs ruling. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 04:46, 1 October 2007 (BST)

Banned 48 hrs. --Max Grivas ^{JG / M.F.T.} 05:01, 1 October 2007 (BST)

Scargul

Wiped the Emo Killers page... why do they all do the same thing, every time? It's like they're clones ;) -- boxy • talk • 10:44 30 September 2007 (BST)

Warned. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 11:17, 30 September 2007 (BST)

XTangerinex

A permabanned alt of that Tangerine fellow 2 vandals down? Can a mod confirm this? --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{^{^{^{^{#nerftemplatedsigs}}}}} 05:37, 30 September 2007 (BST) By the looks of it...it seems that way...seeing that they have the exact same user page layout and stuff... --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{^{^{^{^{#nerftemplatedsigs}}}}} 05:38, 30 September 2007 (BST)

no i jst liked th name nd layout.......im not a vandal???XTangerinex 05:52, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Then you shouldn't have picked a banned vandal to copy. Permabanned as an Izumi alt -- boxy • talk • 05:58 30 September 2007 (BST)

Akule

I got an anonymous email the other day sending me all these spam edits. I checked some of them out and it fits into the Codename V genre of spam. Some are a bit old but whatever. Here's the email I got, code and all.

spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam and spam --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 03:17, 30 September 2007 (BST)

I'm loathed to act on an anonymously sent email. I'm going to rule it not vandalism unless one of the targeted users actually complains himself.-- Evil Vista 03:20, 30 September 2007 (BST)

It's not anonymous. I know who it is. He just doesn't want to be named. I can tell you though the reason why is because he doesn't want to be affected by the drama anymore than he already has to deal with on his talk page. Catch my drift? --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 03:22, 30 September 2007 (BST)

V of Vandalism, IMHO. Several pages have the same content, and serve only to advertise the discussion akule had with grim on kevan's page to those who had something against grim. In the other hand, this is weeks old, so if we haven't warned him on due time, i dont think we should now. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 03:35, 30 September 2007 (BST)

There wasnt a discussion between myself and akule there. I simply said my piece then left and didnt return to it, and while i agree this is spam, i cant do anything about it, because to do so would invite the OMG BIAS crowd. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 04:07, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Akule is an ass. enough said about that. but we've got 4 message of sep 8, and 8 messages of september 12. To drag it up 22 to 18 days later on the prompting of somebody who must remain nameless? It's as much drama inducing idiocy as Akule is prone to. I can see your dilemma but Saromu should have known better then to try and pull this.-- Vista +1 04:17, 30 September 2007 (BST)

So you lied about it? Saromu, Don't start up drama like this by acting as a facilitator again and don't ever you lie on a vandal banning report. You just came this close to a warning. Next time you'll receive it. They're talk pages, as long as the owners of the talk pages aren't objecting, I don't see the harm that should be inherent to vandalism.-- Evil Vista 03:43, 30 September 2007 (BST)

It's not a lie. The person wants to remain anonymous. How the fuck is that a lie if the person doesn't want people to know since he's not in the position to report Akule? --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 03:45, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Saromu? don't piss me off any further. You're this close for getting a warning for misuse of the vandal banning page. Look up in a dictionary what "anonymous" means. Didn't the fact that somebody didn't want their name known for drama purposes tip you off, what kind of effect you posting it in his undisclosed name would be. grow up and go troll somewhere else.-- Evil Vista 03:59, 30 September 2007 (BST)

You got an email address where I can forward the email to you? This way you can understand what the fuck I'm talking about instead of assuming whatever evil intentions you believe I have. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 04:10, 30 September 2007 (BST)

I know who it is now. Vista, let him forward you the mail. Go to his page and send him an email through the email user system so he can get your address without letting spambots harvest it. Its all set up. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 04:24, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Isn't this getting too lenghty already? I mean, all this fuss because you don't want to miss the opportunity to give Akule his second warning, but even if you prove somehow the importancy and unbiasedness of the guy that sent this email (if there's such a thing, I'm not certain) there's still the issue that that was almost a month ago. And that we had everyone else not complaining at the time. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 04:31, 30 September 2007 (BST)

If you are not a System Operator, the user who made the vandal report, the user being reported, or in any way directly involved in the case, the administration strongly asks that you use the talk page for further discussion. Same thing you have been pointing out to others here matt. You arent a sysop anymore. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 04:35, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Lets stop the tread here. Saromu I'm not assuming any evil intentions. I'm assuming partial idiocy. Surely you must have seen how this would go? Anyway, I've got my e-mail activated, just go to my user page and use the email this user option in the toolbox. If it's anybody but Kevan I'm still going to be pissed. In fact if it is Kevan I'm still going to be pissed, because then you handled it like a... But lets move on.-- Vista +1 04:37, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Ha ha ha. At no time did I request to remain anonymous about anything. I noticed these edits shortly after they occurred as I was preparing materials for my ongoing arbitration case. I forwarded them to Sonny due to their startlingly similarity with his recent report of edits made by Codename V. Should Sonny and I chose to correspond about events in game our out its no ones business but our own. Should a sysop choose to weigh a vandal case on any merits other than a review of the edits themselves and knowledge of precedent they are doing the wiki a disservice. --Max Grivas ^{JG / M.F.T.} 03:52, 1 October 2007 (BST)

What? I didn't get this email from you. I got it from Kevan. Codename A From: kevan@dux.kevan.org

That's what my email says. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 03:54, 1 October 2007 (BST) THIS CASE IS CLOSED UNTILL FURTHER NOTICE. WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? USE THE TALKPAGE.-- Vista +1 04:37, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Tangerine

Another sockpuppet of Izumi Orimoto, the Permabanned, used to edit our group page before Chill deleted it. Also used to edit the Lockettside page here. --Sheila Broflovski 23:40, 29 September 2007 (BST)

They're just popping out of the woodwork today, aren't they?--Seventythree^Talk 23:44, 29 September 2007 (BST)

Please have a look at the administration notice above 73. Your comments are making navigating through the page quite obnoxious. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 01:12, 30 September 2007 (BST)

First of all, based on you guys using it as a conversation board I ASSUMED you were using it as a talk page. SECONDLY, mind your own business. I haven't vandalized anything and have made many good faith edits. And I have no control over what Chill does, he's not even a member anymore. My history is clean, and I have a different IP address, so you have no proof of my identity. Just assume I'm a different person.Tangerine 00:26, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Permabanned. Confirmed as Izumi Orimoto. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 02:11, 30 September 2007 (BST)

While perma-banning a vandal-alt is ok, i must agree with tangerines points. If you want your page to have the this is our group, only we can edit it protection rights, it's better you start using it as a group page (adding the group template box is a good start). And posting a report in a suburb IS NOT vandalism, and shouldn't have been brought to this page as evidence of vandalism. And 73, please follow the administration notice above. This is a warning, next time i'll report you as vandal if no one else does. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 02:40, 30 September 2007 (BST)

You know what happens when you ASSUME, Izumi....KIss Kiss! --Jimmy Kimmel 00:36, 1 October 2007 (BST)

Chill

Decided to vandalise a group page. --User:Axe27/Sig 23:31, 29 September 2007 (BST)

That looks like vandalism to me.--Seventythree^Talk 23:32, 29 September 2007 (BST)

Vandalism - And who promoted you to SysOp, 73 ? I seem to have missed the memo. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 02:43, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Is it really vandalism if I'm pointing out an illegal PKer group that abuses proxies to kill people?Chill 02:52, 30 September 2007 (BST)

You have cleared their group page. Yes, they are PK'ers, but they are also Urban Dead players. Player Killing is not an illegal activiy in Urban Dead. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 03:00, 30 September 2007 (BST)

But using proxies to do their dirtyu work makes it illegal Chill 03:24, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Perhaps, but it's not our job in the wiki to fight how they play, but how they use it. If you want to bring attention to this, edit the group NPOV section (while keeping the page intact), or message Kevan. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 03:29, 30 September 2007 (BST)

You havne't got a leg to stand on Chill, their alleged cheating does not mean that you are free to wipe their whole group page and replace it with your allegations. Use the talk page if you want to bring such stuff up -- boxy • talk • 03:33 30 September 2007 (BST) It's within my power to post whatever I want on my talk page...correct?Chill 03:51, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Chill, you can accuse the Late Night TV Crue of using proxies all you want, it doesn't make it true. Our group has members from all over the USA. We have members in California, Colorado, Washington DC and Georgia. We are not one person playing a bunch of alts using proxies. How could we simultaneously attack you losers at St. Alexanders if we were one person? Don't make false accusations you can't back up. And quit editing our Wiki page. --Jimmy Kimmel 13:43, 30 September 2007 (BST)

Watson192

Vandalized my user page. Nalikill ^{TALK E! W! M! USAI} 19:14, 29 September 2007 (BST)

Already dealt with. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 19:16, 29 September 2007 (BST)

Flatts

Needs to stop spamming people's talk pages, or he's gonna get banned. I left a note on his talk page, but IIRC there's something about making a # of wholly unconstructive edits? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 16:21, 29 September 2007 (BST)

Perma'd. Spammer like Mr Krabs. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 16:22, 29 September 2007 (BST)

Sockpuppet of Mr Krabs? --Pavluk ^{A! E!} 16:24, 29 September 2007 (BST)

Checked, possibly, but records dont go back that far. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 16:31, 29 September 2007 (BST)

Ahrimmagicks

Vandalised the Whittenside page AND posted biased bullshit news at the same time I managed to fix the mess... The man 10:50, 28 September 2007 (BST)

Take a chill pill, man. A newbie mistake, and a bit of propaganda. Revert it, forget about it (unless it becomes an ongoing problem). Not vandalism -- boxy • talk • 11:02 28 September 2007 (BST)

ok, I'll chill. The man 20:30, 28 September 2007 (BST)

Tony Darkgrave

Cited for blanking the Clan Wolverine group page and their corresponding talk page. --^T 22:48, 27 September 2007 (BST)

Vvarned.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 23:28, 27 September 2007 (BST)

Montana8

For this 'refinement' of Example_page. Also, this to my userpage --Pavluk ^{A! E!} 17:22, 26 September 2007 (BST)

Vandalism. On due process of being warned. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 17:50, 26 September 2

Codename V

Spamming again like he did last year. More more more more more. Won't stop. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 06:50, 23 September 2007 (BST)

Warned --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 07:21, 23 September 2007 (BST)

Reverted all his spam. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 07:25, 23 September 2007 (BST)

Hardly spam. Seeing as Grim is a memeber of the RRF, let's get a less baised mod to rule on this. --User:Axe27/Sig 17:39, 23 September 2007 (BST)

How is it spam to use talk pages for their intended purpose- to coordinate with fellow groups- how is it spam to do what you, grim, criticize us for not doing?- that is to say- playing smarter rather than complaining? Nalikill ^{TALK E! W! M! USAI} 17:59, 23 September 2007 (BST)

I am NOT a member of the RRF, nor have i been for more than a year, in fact, i am not even presently a member of any zombie group, and have not been for at the very least a month. I just hang out in the IRC channels because i happen to be friends with some people who are in those groups. We have a long history of warning and/or banning people who post spam on this wiki. It is neither appreciated nor welcome. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 18:03, 23 September 2007 (BST)

A couple of Precidents for you. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 18:06, 23 September 2007 (BST)

Not to mention the precedent set by Codename V himself a year and a half ago or whatever when he spammed the crap out of everyone and got warned for it then, too. This has happened before. What really sucks is that V knows this behavior isn't tolerated, because he got warned here before (and he got warned for the same crap on NexusWiki, IIRC).--Jorm 18:14, 23 September 2007 (BST)

Another precident. This one by boxy. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 18:16, 23 September 2007 (BST)

V of Vandalism. Just reiforcing grim's ruling. Wasn't a rule made to combat this kind of thing, just because codename V spammed the hell out of group pages about his event ? --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 18:15, 23 September 2007 (BST)

Strictly speaking, as its a known vandal alt of User:Rip_purr, i would have been well within my rights to permaban this account. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 18:18, 23 September 2007 (BST)

Ah, leave it be. It's a harmless dood trying to promote his event. We had our fun last year thanks to him and we will have it again this year too. But if he spam again about it, then we might be within our rights to give him th' boot. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 18:24, 23 September 2007 (BST)

Boot of win. I se-second your ruling.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 18:25, 23 September 2007 (BST)

Can we get a policy made to stop spamming? Call it V for Vandalism like what hagnat said. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 23:55, 23 September 2007 (BST)

Hagnat

Apparently page ownership means nothing to hagnat. I posted that on there. I had presumed I had the right to tell him to "shut up" on MY talk page. He didn't. I clearly warned him not to post there again, except to say "I NEED TO TALK TO YOU". Nalikill ^{TALK E! W! M! USAI} 11:34, 21 September 2007 (BST)

Not vandalism. We don't warn people for trying to talk to somebody using the appropiate channel. This would be different if there were an arbitration ruling active.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 12:11, 21 September 2007 (BST)

Just chiming in here.

...what isn't vandalism: An unwanted edit to any page. (Formatted for the page and snipped a little, but the original can be found here: UDWiki:Vandalism --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 16:27, 21 September 2007 (BST)

Discussion moved to talk page--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 04:59, 22 September 2007 (BST)

Vow

Screwing with and/or impersonating Conndraka's posting here. I'm also hitting three different IPs on check-user and trying to cross-check via Proxies at the moment. --Karlsbad

... Jeez. I was just trying to help. Give me a break.--Vow 02:40, 21 September 2007 (BST)

IMHO, please chock it up to being a newbie, and declare it not vandalism, please. Nalikill ^{TALK E! W! M! USAI} 03:26, 21 September 2007 (BST)

Who promoted you to sysop nalikill ? --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 05:55, 21 September 2007 (BST)

Srsly.--Jorm 06:08, 21 September 2007 (BST)

Not vandalism. The guy was just trying to help. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 05:33, 21 September 2007 (BST)

Gregg bayes

For recreating a deleted page in obvious bad faith and against standing policy: the DEM Roster. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 21:46, 20 September 2007 (BST)

Also, impersonation if you want... more likely an "I create my own supporters" case. This guy's "uncontributions" are getting annoying. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 22:28, 20 September 2007 (BST)

The reason why I thought it was vandalism, is that Neon God is a subpage of Quagmister. If you look deeper on Quagmister's special contributions page you can see this post and this template that Quagmister created. I assume it is probably why boxy had to revert a vandalism that Gregg had done to Quagmister's user page. --Akule ^{School's in session.} 22:40, 20 September 2007 (BST)

He is quoting. See the italics and quotation marks around the stuff you are complaining about in the link you provided matt? Also, see the date of the quoted material. 5th of September.

Also, he hasnt recreated the page. He has created a different page referring to the original under the same name. No deletion workaround there, and even then, its only A/VB stuff if he does it repeatedly.

Also, the guidelines linked to are for sysops, not regular users. Thus they do not apply.

As a result of these facts, i am going to rule Not vandalism --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 00:43, 21 September 2007 (BST)

Blood Panther and Zrex244

This isn't a case for vandal banning; it's arbitration at best. Why are you trying to be sysop-lite?--Jorm 04:23, 16 September 2007 (BST)

No. Just wanted edit war to stop. Sorry. Nalikill 04:24, 16 September 2007 (BST)

Or they could use the talk page instead of arbitration. Thats why there is a talk page in the first place, to be able to discuss what should be put on the regular page. 99% off all the content related editing drama would be avoided if people learned that. anyway, not vandalism-- Vista +1 04:43, 16 September 2007 (BST)

wow, did not expect this. ok to start with, we are currently talking on our own talk pages, and neither one of us had any hard feelings here. secondly im going to say that this was all caused by me awhile ago, back before i knew wiki rules. as you can see here [5] im part of a group located in ketchelbank, so i changed the ketchelbank and areas radio Frequencie to that of my groups. then i forgot about it. if you want to warn me for that fine, i did make a mistake then. in anycase, the "problem" now is i am trying to fix my error, by undoing my old edit. but Zrex244 has set up on the current Frequencie. in anycase we have been working it out nicly and it's deffently not vandalism.--'BP^Tmz 04:55, 16 September 2007 (BST)

Lovely. case closed.-- Vista +1 05:01, 16 September 2007 (BST)

Suicidalangel and A Helpful Little Gnome

(S.A.'s) For this edit. (AHLG's) He's such a bad person.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 22:46, 15 September 2007 (BST)

One warning to gnome for the hacks. One warning to Herr Engle for the page wipe. One warning to Herr Engle for superfluous vandal reports. --Max Grivas ^{JG / M.F.T.} 00:26, 16 September 2007 (BST)

Seventythree and Nalikill

It is in good faith. I hate drama. A lot of it comes from the deletions queue. What gave you the right to remove it? Every page can be nominated for deletion. I never saw the policy that said otherwise. Nalikill 21:39, 15 September 2007 (BST)

Was trying to make a point. I'll remove it, obviously. And It obviously would'nt ever be deleted. It's a good faith edit, because I'm trying to introduce just a little perspective into the recent proceedings. People seem to have been caught up just recently with using these pages to attack each other as opposed to what they where intended for.--Seventythree 21:42, 15 September 2007 (BST)

Both users banned for a day. This is the same things as going into your Police Department and telling to stop punishing criminals because cops sometimes shoot and kill people. There is no point in asking for the Deletion page to be deleted, and this actions goes against the whole administration of the wiki. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 21:52, 15 September 2007 (BST)

in several occasions users got two or more warnings for a single action. This always decided based on the gravity of their actions. I made a judgment call, and decided that a 24h would help them calm their heads, realize that nothing would be gained by following their track of actions, and give us space to carry on with our business. I had reverted the article 3 times to its original form, but they kept adding the deletion request for the deletions page. Even when i filled this vandalism report they displayed no interest in stopping this whole thing, so the only way was to temporarily revoke their rights to edit this wiki. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 22:16, 15 September 2007 (BST)

Both unbanned due to complete lack justification for not following the normal procedure combined with likely misconduct,
Ruled not vandalism for Seventythree.
a single warning for Nalikill for continued misuse of the deletions page.

The rest will argued on the misconduct page.-- Vista +1 00:59, 16 September 2007 (BST)

And if somebody could tell me where the bleep the unban button went I'd be much obliged.-- Vista +1 01:24, 16 September 2007 (BST)

Both unbanned.-- Vista +1 01:29, 16 September 2007 (BST)

moved every non-participants' comments to the talkpage-- Vista +1 01:36, 16 September 2007 (BST)

Byteme42

Creation of the Salt The Metagame Policy page which is clearly in bad faith. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 20:50, 15 September 2007 (BST)

'Cos we realy need some more drama.--Seventythree 20:51, 15 September 2007 (BST)

Better to get it over with now instead of letting it last ofr several days. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 20:53, 15 September 2007 (BST)

Meh. Point taken. Is it realy neccisary to vandal ban this guy though? --Seventythree 20:54, 15 September 2007 (BST)

Yes. Because if he adds it to his userpage after it is deemed bad faith he can be banned. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 20:55, 15 September 2007 (BST)

No. This guy isn't a vandal. That page isn't bad faith. He was coming up with tactics to counter the zombie tactics. That's not against the rules- the page as it now exists promotes trolling, which breaks no laws. So he isn't a vandal. If this action against him persists, I would reccomend that he take it to Arbitration. And the page is already up for deletion. Let that be the deciding ground, not the vandal banning page. Nalikill 21:13, 15 September 2007 (BST)

If that is so then I can make a tactic to hunt down each survivor group leader in real life and then have their computers smashed. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 21:15, 15 September 2007 (BST)

No. Becuase DESTROYING PROPERTY is illegal. BEING A JACKASS ON A FORUM isn't. If you're too stupid to see the abcense of a parelell, GTFO Nalikill 21:17, 15 September 2007 (BST)

What he is calling for destroys the property of jorm and costs him money. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 21:26, 15 September 2007 (BST)

Ah, so by trolling Kevan's wiki, we cost him money and destroy his property. I shall call in for both of our arrests, in that case. Nalikill 21:27, 15 September 2007 (BST)

No. It's a public wiki. It isn't the same as a private forum or an IRC server. Many times I called people idiots, but you, you...oh you are truly close to the top of the list. How you can compare invading a site to being a dick on a wiki is beyond me. My only guess is that you're an uniformed 13 yr old newfag to the internets. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 21:30, 15 September 2007 (BST)

Funny, I was just thinking the same thing about you, except change "you're" to "Your mother is". And, okay then, faulty metaphor. What about trolling on Something Awful? Why ain't those people been arrested? And you still haven't explained the difference between trolling and forum invasion to me, dumbass.Nalikill 21:32, 15 September 2007 (BST)

Not Vandalism The guy is an asshole, but so am i. At least i am not a troll, which he also is. Sadly, i cant ban trolls for being trolls, but that can be arranged. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 21:16, 15 September 2007 (BST)

I know: How about instead of this going on for bloody ages and leaving no-one satisfied but everyone pissed off coupled with page after page of drama we just delete this and pretend it never happened? Please? (off topic question:what would happen if you put the deletions page up for deletions?). --Seventythree 21:19, 15 September 2007 (BST)

those who forget their past, don't have a future, some wise guy i dont remember the name. Pretending this never happened will give us nothing. And even if the Deletions page was listed in Deletions, it would never be deleted because its a useful tool for the adminstration of this wiki. If it was deleted, then any sysop would have the right to delete any page. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 21:31, 15 September 2007 (BST)

Jorm

Repeated deletion of content on Salt The Metagame Policy(history)

Upon attempting contact to see if there was a good-faith motive, my questions were repeatedly removed from his talk page

Byteme42 19:11, 15 September 2007 (BST)

Not Vandalism. This is not a group page, this is a policy. It is a community page, and should not ask others to commit actions such as Denial of Service attacks against public or private property, even more against a service that is being offered for this community for free. This would be the same thing as to ask people to DoS or disrupt the Urban Dead wiki because people use it to gather information. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 19:56, 15 September 2007 (BST)

Not vandalism. Jorm might have been a touch heavy handed but he had every right to be heavy handed. The page was obviously in bad faith even after the DDOS bit was removed. Jorm acted well within his bounds as not only was this page in the main name space making this nothing more then a edit war at most, but it called for illegal actions first overtly then in more clouded reverences even when it was a personal page Jorm actions would have been good faith as we do not condone illegal activities of that sort here.-- Vista +1 00:14, 16 September 2007 (BST)

Complete discussion moved to talk page

1zumi

Puh, lease. Ban him please. Linkage to come. Too busy undoing vandalism. (linked now below) Nalikill 04:21, 14 September 2007 (BST) Linkage: Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Linked.Nalikill 04:22, 14 September 2007 (BST)

hmmm seems a little too stupid for izumi....copycat?--'BP^Tmz 04:26, 14 September 2007 (BST)

Still watching for vandalism. God, I wish I could ban these guys myself.Nalikill 04:28, 14 September 2007 (BST)

Good god, how could anyone be this stupid?!!!!!!!!!!!!!Nalikill 04:30, 14 September 2007 (BST)

again im not sure this is izumi. could a sysop do a check user check?--'BP^Tmz 04:33, 14 September 2007 (BST)

Max banned him an instant before i could. Damn. And please post your links like shown above, its infuriating to have to fix them. --The Grimch ^U! 04:35, 14 September 2007 (BST)

Oh, and it wasnt Izumi, checkuser links it to another person, whom i am warning now (I forgot to do this earlier). --The Grimch ^U! 08:41, 14 September 2007 (BST)

Turns out the offender already had 2 warnings. Banned for 24 hours. --The Grimch ^U! 08:47, 14 September 2007 (BST)

so my hunch was correct? spooky.--'BP^Tmz 20:38, 14 September 2007 (BST)

Freya

Someone keeps wondering why it hurts when they smash their head into a wall.--Jorm 02:12, 14 September 2007 (BST)

More headsmashing. If you want to leave a message, deleting stuff is not the way to do it.--Jorm 02:21, 14 September 2007 (BST)

Izumi alt banned. Message received. Better luck next time we meet. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 02:25, 14 September 2007 (BST)

LucyFord

Made two edits to group pages: HARD's here and the DRRP's here. I've reverted both edits. --the one, the only, sushiknight ^{(talk contribs HARD E.N.D.)} 02:08, 14 September 2007 (BST)

I'm going to assume good faith here, it's a newbie who doesn't know the rules about group pages. I'll have a quiet word on his talk page though The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 03:37 14 September 2007 (BST)

Cheers. --the one, the only, sushiknight ^{(talk contribs HARD E.N.D.)} 03:59, 14 September 2007 (BST)

LucyFord

I'm not sure there's anything in it, but this looked a little fishy. --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 15:42, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Hm... now that I think about it, this could possibly be Izumi. The account was only made today, and she's already making edits like a pro. --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 15:44, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Thou shalt wait for an op. The op shalt use checkuser, and then shall the banning occur~fifth gospel of Saint Wiki Nalikill 20:37, 13 September 2007 (BST)

We have absolutely no way to prove that. Different IPs. And, of course, being a new user is not vandalism.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 20:50, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Rogue

I'm pretty sure that threats of physical violence against other users is still against the rules? Or is this magically going to be not vandalism as well? --Akule ^{School's in session.} 00:05, 13 September 2007 (BST)

yeah, I rather did a double-take on that one myself. I pretty much said my piece on it at the civility policy discussion. It's one thing to be against a policy, but that was uncalled for.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 00:14, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Puts wikilawyer hat on* Hm... is threatening destruction of a person's property banned, or simply threatening the person? When I say 'banned', I mean specifically mentioned. *Takes wikilawyer hat off* Of course, if it doesn't, that doesn't ACTUALLY matter, it was in poor spirit and deserves AT THE LEAST an 'unnoficial' warning. Nalikill 03:49, 13 September 2007 (BST)

If it's allowed for me to put my two cents in here, that's a pretty big friggin stretch. I don't think for a second that Rogue made any tangible threat. It appeared that Rogues point was that he or she would like nothing more than to eliminate your access to a computer. --8 Bucks 16:42, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Not Vandalism for three reasons:

He didnt threaten you
He didnt threaten anything of yours
He posed it as an opinion, not a statement of intent.

Go back to troll school Akule --The Grimch ^U! 04:57, 13 September 2007 (BST)

I don't recall saying that he threatened me. I stated that he threatened other users. Since you came off with a different idea of the intent and assumed he was talking about me, don't you think that should count for something? Oh, also, I will not be accepting any rulings from someone who has an open arbitration case against me, due to blatant bias. I'd prefer a different sysop to rule on this matter. Thanks! --Akule ^{School's in session.} 00:23, 14 September 2007 (BST)

I'm not a sysop, but this comment seems to be of the flippant, throwaway nature. Surely we don't have to warn the user in question officialy? Maybe just remind them of the rules or something. Do they even know this entire thing is going on? I hope someone contacted them about this, It seems a bit unfair if they haven't.--Seventythree 00:29, 14 September 2007 (BST)

Ah, but a simple stroll through his contributions shows that he gets rather "passionate" when it comes to copyright law. --Akule ^{School's in session.} 00:37, 14 September 2007 (BST)

He does? How is this important?--Seventythree 00:39, 14 September 2007 (BST)

Copyright? Pah. Look at some of the images I uploaded. Copyright, copyright, copyright. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{^{^{^{^{#nerftemplatedsigs}}}}} 00:41, 14 September 2007 (BST)

What Grim said... and please don't "debate" the wikilawyer here, it just gums up the page The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 01:01 14 September 2007 (BST)

Akule was simply trying to create more Drama as usual, I apologize for taking the bait. --Rogue 23:14, 14 September 2007 (BST)

Scorproyale

Made this comment on a suggestion under an assumed name. It doesn't appear to be a vote of any kind. Vandalism? -- Pavluk ^A! 23:16, 12 September 2007 (BST)

Well, it's also not really a 'suggestion' as much as it is 'a random collection of words that's just plain stupid', but I understand. I'd say probably not vandalism, because there's no voting template. Nalikill 23:17, 12 September 2007 (BST)

I see what you mean about the suggestion. The assumed name made me suspicious, though. -- Pavluk ^A! 23:22, 12 September 2007 (BST)

Warned for impersonation. --Karlsbad 01:11, 13 September 2007 (BST)

After Research, it seems that "Scorproyale" is consitently signing under "Dasoliderguy"; therefore I assume good faith and will place a notation that his link must direct to his editing-account page. --Karlsbad 01:15, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Izumi Orimoto aka Rika aka Dirty Rockstar et al

Please see contributions from Izumi's latest sockpuppet Rika. She posted on my talk page asking me not to report her further. Having learned nothing from her various warnings, I'm not inclined to ignore her. Besides, it's not my decision to make. Unlike her, I believe in rules. --8 Bucks 14:43, 12 September 2007 (BST)

Perma'd --The Grimch ^U! 14:49, 12 September 2007 (BST)

shouldnt her IP be banned by now? is there even a way to stop here from making a new account each time her old one is banned?--'BP^Tmz 22:26, 12 September 2007 (BST)

I also Perma'd another Sockpuppet account SweetHikari; we're still allowed "shoot-on-site" privileges for Socks, right? --Karlsbad 00:55, 13 September 2007 (BST)

aaaaaaaannnnnnddddd another; R_Nonaka --Karlsbad 01:24, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Two at a time- Reathxia & BelovedHikari. --Karlsbad 01:49, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Don't forget Wind--Karek^maps?! 03:30, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Banned --The Grimch ^U! 05:43, 13 September 2007 (BST)

User:Lunar Love has been banned. Same IP as Izumi's alt, User:Izumi --The Grimch ^U! 07:12, 13 September 2007 (BST)

S.E. and Izumi's conversation moved to S.E.'s talk page.

So...Any chance that you big guys up top will try and work this out?-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 02:54, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Very simple. She had seven chances. She blew them. Now she is no longer welcome. She has shown she has absolutely no respect whatsoever for this wiki or the rules. --The Grimch ^U! 04:30, 13 September 2007 (BST)

I will not violate the rules, vandalize, edit group pages, etc. I was banned for a month over something that I really shouldn't have been, as though it was technically against the rules it was in no way bad faith, I promise. Give me another chance, please. Wind 04:40, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Rules is rules, sorry. I will do my best to convince people, and/or bring about a change- but you've got to realize, it's your own fault for not being able to keep your temper in check. Nalikill 04:54, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Hay guise how bout sum IP bannage to stop this flood of alts? --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 07:19, 13 September 2007 (BST)

IPs have been banned. User:Serenity and User:Envenomation are both proxies, which are *also* against the rules. So we're at what, 9? --Karlsbad 11:01, 13 September 2007 (BST)

14 actually. --The Grimch ^U! 11:47, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Boogie Man

Vandalized this page. Nalikill 22:13, 11 September 2007 (BST)

DID IT AGAIN! and again... Nalikill 22:22, 11 September 2007 (BST)

What do you say, Nalikill? Any more edits from this guy and we revert it till a syops comes on. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{^{^{^{^{#nerftemplatedsigs}}}}} 22:24, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Sure.Nalikill 22:25, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Fucking, did it a third time. SYSOPS, PERMA HIM, PLEASE! and again...Nalikill 22:32, 11 September 2007 (BST)

That was fun... I tried to revert, but looks like people were on top of it --Ryiis 22:35, 11 September 2007 (BST)

permabanned. Thanks for the reverts Nalikill. I shortened the presentation of your links. Don't spank me. --Max Grivas ^{JG / M.F.T.} 22:37, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Thanks. And that was fun. You don't get many vandals that can be that stupid, that fast. Nalikill 22:38, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Say...shouldn't we get rid of my 2 minute late report below this? --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{^{^{^{^{#nerftemplatedsigs}}}}} 22:42, 11 September 2007 (BST) Oh...by the way...if I remember the last vandal like this guy, that would have to be 3page. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{^{^{^{^{#nerftemplatedsigs}}}}} 22:44, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Done, yes and Thanks to everyone. There were lots of folks reverting that BS. --Max Grivas ^{JG / M.F.T.} 22:59, 11 September 2007 (BST)

I do what I can. :)-- AHLG T G THE END IS NIGH! 01:16, 12 September 2007 (BST)

Rika Nonaka

Alt account of banned user Izumi Orimoto (confirmed with checkuser). Please ban. (Reported to me on my talk page by 8 Bucks) --The Grimch ^U! 18:08, 11 September 2007 (BST)

done-- Vista +1 18:14, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Seen

Using the "Random Page" button, I happened upon this group page that seems to have most of it's content removed by Seen on the premise that it was not up-to-date. This is difference in revisions that I could see. --Ryiis 17:03, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Warned --The Grimch ^U! 17:22, 11 September 2007 (BST)

I don't think this was bad faith. The guy even left an edit summary to explain what he was doing. --Toejam ^{A Stats Graph} 23:57, 11 September 2007 (BST)

I think you'll find that he's a member of the group, checking his contributions, he was involved with the Paradox (2006) page before it went historical, and this group is supposedly a sister group. Also he has contributed to the talk page a year ago, speaking as a member The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 03:35 12 September 2007 (BST)

Right...well what Boxy says is correct. We were "reviving" the group but decided a fresh start not related to the restart of paradox would be better. Since its not a very active page and my history with it was quite obvious Im a tiny bit disturbed i got a warning SO fast without the mod even looking in it an inch deeper ><. Also i see "slick willy" changed it back but since he A. was never really related to the group first (grogh was) and B. is in another group i dont see how he has a right to revise my 'vandalism' to the what i pointed out was an outdated perspective. Group btw is for now death but might be revived later. --Seen 03:52, 12 September 2007 (BST)

He percieved it as vandalism. It's the 'whistleblower' law of the wiki- if you revert 'vandalism', you can't be punished for it. He probably saw this case here and decided to revert it. Nalikill 04:01, 12 September 2007 (BST)

I was too fast...i now saw it was the mod who changed it back. Well Ill let him decide if he wants to come back on his decision...and my warning ;)--Seen 04:03, 12 September 2007 (BST)

Fair enough, if it was a member who did it, warning revoked. Deleting from vandal data. --The Grimch ^U! 04:33, 12 September 2007 (BST)

Steel Reserve 0

Not sure the deal behind this Edit, but totally blanking out DORIS news in Santlerville made me raise a brow.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 23:35, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Almost definitely vandalism. Nalikill 23:39, 10 September 2007 (BST)

anything?--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 01:18, 12 September 2007 (BST)

I replaced it and gave a friendly type redirection instead of a warning. --Max Grivas ^{JG / M.F.T.} 01:37, 12 September 2007 (BST)

okay, I thought it mighta gotten skipped cuz of Nalikill pipin up--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 01:39, 12 September 2007 (BST)

I think it had slipped through the cracks thanks for the nudge. --Max Grivas ^{JG / M.F.T.} 01:53, 12 September 2007 (BST)

The_editor

Pure Ban --Karlsbad 18:30, 10 September 2007 (BST)

And misterGame?-- Vista +1 19:08, 10 September 2007 (BST)

I believed that I banned IP, but should I ban the account as well? --Karlsbad 19:11, 10 September 2007 (BST)

You should if you want to ban both usernames from being used. Right now MisterGame can still edit with another IP. It's a minor matter.-- Vista +1 18:05, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Mr. Krabs

Contributions. Every single edit since he signed up is a variant of "Where's me money? (Steal's (USERNAME)'s wallet)", with a signature at the end. It looks like he picked a User talk page, and has been jumping from talk page to talk page for about 40minutes now, doing this. I left him a note to please stop on his talk page, which was responded to with more stupid spam. Ekashp wuz here (aht harman bra!nz!) 15:11, 10 September 2007 (BST)

You too? I was spammed by this guy!

P02 Samuel Talk to me! Stop that asshole!PoleCats

15:28, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Quite the vandalism spree from this 'user'. He did this to the Orr Building page, amongst many others. Most of them are User pages though, is it OK for third parties to revert them? -- Pavluk ^A! 15:51, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Permad and i rolled back every page except those he created. Sorry for not getting him sooner, i was busy elsewhere. --The Grimch ^U! 15:53, 10 September 2007 (BST)

You mean the average user undoing a vandalism, Pavluk? Probably a yes, since it'd make it a little easier on the sysops.-- AHLG T G THE END IS NIGH! 19:29, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Yes, anyone can undo vandalism. And how come nobody asked me if I wanted the comment removed from my page huh? Just kidding. :P.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 20:01, 10 September 2007 (BST)

The guy got my page to. You think he could at least find something funny to spam all over the place. Oh, and thanks for the quick revert Grim! --Goofy McCoy ^{mfd HK-47 talk} 00:19, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Thanks for the clarification, guys! -- Pavluk ^A! 00:21, 11 September 2007 (BST)

If this happens too often we should have a template, like the vandalism one that people like Grim_s can stick on pages they revert. Something like Some numbnut vandalised your page. We fixed it though.--Seventythree 01:49, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Sounds like a plan! Just need to find a pretty picture first though...Any suggestions? Throw the link on my talk.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 01:55, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Ugh, that makes it worse for us. I reverted some 70 pages in five minutes because sysops can revert from a users contributions with the rollback button makes it nice and fast. Having to go onto someones page to lay down a template will really slow things down. Bbesides, reverting vandalism is a valid exception to the dont edit other peoples userpages rule. You wont be banned or warned for undoing the vandalism of vandals. --The Grimch ^U! 07:56, 11 September 2007 (BST)

So...You're actively trying to take away my motivation for making all my flagboxes into templates? That makes me sad... :P.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 10:32, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Looter69

Modified a user page in order to disseminate false information. Impersonation also since he made the modified content appear as posted by me. Another BBK member who can't be bothered with reading the rules.--Finis Valorum 11:05, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Warned for vandalising the userpage. --The Grimch ^U! 11:12, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Izumi Orimoto

Moar ban evasion. --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 07:30, 10 September 2007 (BST)

And Permabanned. --The Grimch ^U! 07:42, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Huh, thats odd. Cant seem to unblock him (needs to be done before the ban can be upgraded) --The Grimch ^U! 07:45, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Bugger. Mediawiki wasnt any help either. Used to be a button. Bah.

	The Good Old Days…
	This user remembers the good old days, when unbanning a user was done with the push of a button, and help files were both easy to find and helpful..

--The Grimch ^U! 07:56, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Oh, by the way, I'm a girl. And I can edit this wiki any time I choose, you just won't know its me. Izumi O 07:59, 10 September 2007 (BST)

'K. --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 08:41, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Now its done. --The Grimch ^U! 11:03, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Izumi Orimoto

Ban Evasion.
Vandalism with second account here
Confession to being Izumi here and here. Checkuser wont work because when i sent him on his month long sabbatical due to his vandalism detailed in the previous report, i blocked his IP too (Didnt uncheck the checkboxes). --The Grimch ^U! 05:59, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Banned for 1 year. Puppet folded and placed into sock drawer. --Max Grivas ^{JG / M.F.T.} 06:24, 10 September 2007 (BST)

GUESS WHAT?!?!? I'M NOT GONNA STOP THERE EITHER. I'll Keep going. I guess you have to ban me infinitely now, awwww too bad! FUCK YOU. FUCK ALL OF YOU. Don't blame this on ME. This is YOUR FAULT. YOU'RE THE ONES RESPONSIBLE. Your lack of respect, mindless and cold-hearted bureaucracy and rudeness has ultimately driven me from this wiki with a lessened faith in humanity in general. GOODBYE. Izumi 06:55, 10 September 2007 (BST)

I lol'd. --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 07:02, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Heh, that sounds almost like every second person I know - If Jedaz = 07:34, 10 September 2007 (BST) then pi = 2 + 1

Holy cow! I have followed Izumi's career with some interest, and have long been amused at her inner conflict of promoting peace between zombies and humans in Malton, yet being foul mouthed and reactionary on the wiki. I'd say good call folks.--Squid Boy 17:06, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Officer_123satsitx

Blanked voting on his suggestion once things went downhill, then proceeded to wipe the page once it got another kill vote after the first removal.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 23:57, 9 September 2007 (BST)

I looked at it, I think he was just confused... he put his suggestion under Developing Suggestions on the suggestions talk page, maybe he was confused on how to remove it? I'd say that this was a good faith error, IMHO. Nalikill 01:55, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Ordinarily they say something like "I'm done wit diz sugestion, plz git rid of it", not just removing all the votes. :)-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 02:05, 10 September 2007 (BST)

yeah... sorry. I'm kinda confused about how to remove suggestions. I thought that was what you did :( I didn't just remove the votes, I removed the whole thing to be revised on the Developing Suggestions page. I apologize. I can delete it if you want.

Also, how should I have removed it? --Officer 123satsitx 02:22, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Next time, just put {{Removed}}

on there, and sign it with something like "I've removed this suggestion to Talk:Suggestions Nalikill 02:23, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Thanks, and sorry again. I'll think twice before removing any suggestions I make. --Officer 123satsitx 02:45, 10 September 2007 (BST)

'nuff said. Not vandalism.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 02:59, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Oh good, glad it was just paranoia on my part! Welcome to the team Officer.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 10:43, 10 September 2007 (BST)

That's ok. Thanks all, and once again (this must be getting boring for all of you) sorry.--Officer 123satsitx 21:04, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Hagnat

Hagnat (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss) He vandalized the wiki's policy on sysop promotion- he changed it without permission from the community, or a change in policy. I thought this mjight be better than misconduct for this. Policy on Promotions He added qualifications and changed the text so as to change the policy. Nalikill 19:22, 8 September 2007 (BST)

Not Vandalism - The guidelines were written when the wiki was very young, almost two years ago. Hagnats edit to the guidelines reflects accurately upon the intended spirit of those guidelines, plus it just makes sense. Also, even if it wasnt, it was still an edit made in good faith, and not against any policy or precident i can find that would force my hand. --The Grimch ^U! 19:41, 8 September 2007 (BST)

Okay, it's not vandalism. But he still can't change an administrative policy without a vote. Nalikill 19:42, 8 September 2007 (BST)

He didnt. He clarified the intent of the existing guidelines to eliminate a silly loophole abusable by rules lawyers. --The Grimch ^U! 19:46, 8 September 2007 (BST)

Then he should add that he probably rather than, won't be accepted if it's not within the last 6 months. One is a guideline, the other is an illegal policy change. Nalikill 19:47, 8 September 2007 (BST)

No. He was fixing the policies wording to match its intent. Now i must insist that you and hagnat stop your edit war. --The Grimch ^U! 19:55, 8 September 2007 (BST)

Actually, Hagnat did change the rules instead of clarify them. That "in the last six months" bit was completely new and never intentioned mainly because nobody though of the possibility of inactive users running for sysop back then. Hagnat even said it was a rule change. It might be a good one but he just shouldn't decide to add it himself. Now it's probably good faith edit and not vandalism, but thats not my call anyway as you are the sysop who took on this case, but it was not fixing the policies wording to match its intent. He introduced a new one. Now Odd starter might have had the authority to write new rules back in the day but now we have policy discussions. And as long as that hasn't happened the rules should go back to what they were.-- Vista +1 22:10, 8 September 2007 (BST)

it's only vandalism if it's done in bad faith. Since any promotion bid is due to fail it the user doesnt regulary edit the wiki, i decided to put that single line in there, so people don't put themselves for promotion unless they are really active enough. 500 in 6 months is less than 100 edits per month, which i think displays enough activity for a user to be promoted. This is a case where we dont need to go all the way through Policy discussion. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 19:39, 8 September 2007 (BST)

You still can't change a policy without a vote. The policy never read "within six months." Create a policy to change it to that if you want to change it to that. Otherwise, you don't have the power to change it. Nalikill 19:41, 8 September 2007 (BST)

Yes i can, and so can you. As long as the edit in question is done with common sense in mind, no one will argue about your edit, and even if they do, it's just a matter of rolling back the edit, and then questioning the edit in the policy talk page, filling an arby (in serious cases), or then moving the edit to policy discussion, if enough people are against and for the edit in question. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 19:46, 8 September 2007 (BST)

Not with rules hagnat. We've got a very specific system for changing the rules of this wiki. What you are describing is for general editing. And you know that.-- Vista +1 22:17, 8 September 2007 (BST)

These were rules that Odd Starter wrote whitouve consulting the community in the first place, and they were already changed several other times without going through policy discussion. Why must we go all the way through the bureaucracy just to change a line of rules that is poorly written ? --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 02:27, 9 September 2007 (BST)

Why do we have to go through all that stupid "due process" shit to execute people? Why can't we just behead them in the streets? I mean, it's all just useless bureaucracy anyway, right? Nalikill 03:06, 9 September 2007 (BST)

This has been ruled on, please take any further discussion to Template talk:Promotions Intro The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 03:23 9 September 2007 (BST)

Izumi Orimoto

Edited the Viva la revolution page here, here and here. --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 13:08, 8 September 2007 (BST)

Banned for one month. --The Grimch ^U! 17:33, 8 September 2007 (BST)

Okay, this is BULL SHIT. I wasn't vandalizing. I deleted my name ONCE. I got told to stop, and I did. So then I altered a swear word to something less degrading and asked why I was on the list. IT WASNT EVEN BAD FAITH. I'm DONE. D-O-N-E-DONE with your screwed up wiki and its little nazi moderators that think they can just screw around with everyone for no good reason. Go ahead and ban me, I know its coming. Ban my main for a YEAR. In fact, go nuts, delete my accounts; All of them. I no longer have any wish to be a part of a community that treats its users with no respect. Dirty-Rockstarr 01:08, 10 September 2007 (BST) (Izumi Alt)

We can't delete your account.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 02:03, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Look at my edits. Just LOOK. HOW IS THAT BAD FAITH? Banned for a month for asking a question? Apparently the mods can ban for whatever they see fit. Like I said, I'm done. Either unban me or permaban me. Dirty-Rockstarr 04:04, 10 September 2007 (BST)

As i said on your talk page (Your original one) before you deleted the comment, you should have gone to talk pages. Before i took any action, i checked all the relevenat talk pages and found absolutely nothing. You could have tried arbitration too. You did not. You persisted in editing another groups page. Hell, when i was a newbie, i got done in for exactly what you did. And the month ban is due to the escalating nature of bans from this wiki. A shame you didnt just take the time off, then complain at the end. Now i am afraid that we are forced to remove you for a year. The report is up above. --The Grimch ^U! 06:05, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Madlatvian

Went on a little spree on the wiki and deleted all occurrences of his name, as seen here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. When will they learn. --Banana reads Scoundrell for all of Yesterday's News, Today! 19:36, 7 September 2007 (BST)

More than three edits, none contributive, everything other than the first two are vandalism. My diagnosis: Permabanitis. --The Grimch ^U! 02:53, 8 September 2007 (BST)

Permabanitis = Not lupus.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 07:14, 8 September 2007 (BST)

Gregg bayes

Placed one of his pages, Leighton Kru/Cut You, into Category:Department of Emergency Management, despite the fact that they are (apparently) an enemy of the DEM The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 03:34 7 September 2007 (BST)

But you've got to admit, it's related, so it's probably a good-faith error. I think it'd be appropriate just to let him know that he was wrong to do it, if he is indeed wrong to do so, and tell him to create his own category or put it in an existing one. Nalikill 03:36, 7 September 2007 (BST)

Wanrned. There is already precedent for this with the same category. --Max Grivas ^{JG / M.F.T.} 05:45, 7 September 2007 (BST)

Saromu

Has vandalised an awful lot of suburb pages, deleting all groups in the "Survivors" category, even though in many cases they are still there. Not only is this inaccurate, if not often blatantly untrue, it is a case of "blanking sections" without real justification or right. Surely it's up to the groups themselves to remove themselves if they're not there (which they often are)?--Crabappleslegalteam 13:46, 6 September 2007 (BST)

Actually, many of those suburbs I've been through where he removed the survivor groups don't have those survivor groups. That and it is kinda a good thing for those sections to be periodically blanked, many groups have a history of not removing themselves when they aren't in a suburb.--Karek^maps?! 13:56, 6 September 2007 (BST)

This is a bit pre-emptive, however, we think, and somewhat self-servingly innacurate, for a zombie player--Crabappleslegalteam 12:42, 7 September 2007 (BST)

In the case of Molebank, there were multiple groups clearly active in the suburb in the preceding week, with many buildings barricaded and at least two lit around the clock to my knowledge for the whole day preceding the post. It is not up to some Saromu/Karek cabal to dictate policy for managing group lists. Our group did not notice Mr. Saromu/Corleone on his alleged tour, but had he acted in good faith and referenced publicly available intelligence on the area, he could have kept easily avoided any charges of vandalism. Deleting other user's contributions is a criterion for vandalism. He did so with reckless disregard for accuracy. The "not vandalism" declaration recorded below is rash, encouraging further vandalism of this sort and undermining faith in the wiki administration. An addition, boxy speculates on accepting Karek's absurd policy without formal proposal or community input. I move that the decision be reversed and boxy suspended from sysop duties and privileges for an appropriate period. Dylan Mak Tyme 19:19, 7 September 2007 (BST)

That was me who removed all the groups. I toured the whole western side of Malton and over the course of 7 days have not found a single barricaded building in any of the suburbs. That is why I cleaned up the suburb pages. Lukinswood is one I toured recently and didn't see any signs of life, which led me to removing all the groups from the suburb. I thank you for informing me that there are still some survivors active there since the point of removing the groups was to see who was still active. Thank you for your time. --Sonny Corleone RRF DORIS CRF pr0n 17:48, 4 September 2007 (BST)

Not vandalism - I can't see any bad faith in this The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 15:47 6 September 2007 (BST)

Subsequent discussion moved to talk page The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 06:11 9 September 2007 (BST)

GA SW

Vandalised Owsley Crescent Police Department - If Jedaz = 12:47, 6 September 2007 (BST) then pi = 2 + 1

Warned --The Grimch ^U! 12:49, 6 September 2007 (BST)

Grim s

Apparently even by being a sysop, you can forget that there are some consequences for breaking an Arbitration Agreement. What happens if you break an arbitration agreement where someone states that the penalty against breaking it is a one day ban? Oh, yeah. --Akule ^{School's in session.} 00:24, 6 September 2007 (BST)

That is an intelligent and overall friendly discussion, non flaming. Certainly not drama. I dont see how rules lawyering good faith into evil can be done. Why dont we ask Nalikill himself to decide? After all, he didnt report it, and he saw the outcome himself. --The Grimch ^U! 03:46, 6 September 2007 (BST)

That's just what I was about to do, leave the decision up to Nalikill. Will leave a message on his talk page The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 03:50 6 September 2007 (BST)

No, please, don't punish him. He started the discussion in good faith, I chose to continue it and reply to it in good faith. He made an honest mistake- I didn't even remember until I saw this- so please, don't punish him. Nalikill 04:20, 6 September 2007 (BST)

Kudos to you, Noble one.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 04:29, 6 September 2007 (BST)

Disucssion moved to the Talkpage.-- Vista +1 10:04, 7 September 2007 (BST)

Gregg bayes

Created a page for the DEM without their permission. Clearly a bad faith edit if you read the first post. "Oh... shit... fuck... BASTARDS!!!!|DEM|Leighton Kru's devious techniques.}} Brought to you by those annoying bastards at the Leighton Kru" The DEM Roster is clearly owned by the DEM and despite what boxy might say, you can't make a page for a group with the intent of pissing them off. Labine50 edited the page as a resource for the DEM (since it is their roster after all), and Gregg made a series of edits on their page, even after Labine50 reversed the vandalism. --Akule ^{School's in session.} 00:09, 6 September 2007 (BST)

Not vandalism, they created it for their own use, and the use of other enemies of the DEM. Calling it the DEM roster is just common sense, because it's descriptive (although to maintain control of it they should have kept it in their group space ie Leighton Kru/DEM Roster). If you look at the original version of the page, there is absolutely no way you would think it is a page created "for" the DEM, it's even got the Leighton Kru category on it for gods sake! The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 03:45 6 September 2007 (BST)

Just backing up Boxy here. --The Grimch ^U! 06:33, 6 September 2007 (BST)

Yes, boxy. Let's look at the bottom. I note that in Category:Leighton Kru, all of the pages are subpages save for the DEM Roster. If this was meant to be a category page for Leighton Kru and not one giant jab at the DEM, then why wasn't it listed as a subpage for their group, when other pages for their group were? Then, why name the page DEM Roster and add the big template where he is mocking them, much like in his previous vandal case? I believe Sonny explains it best. "And Biff, the roster that was posted was not done to hunt them down. It's obvious who is DEM and who isn't with the group in the profile thingy. It was for the lulz. Purely for the lulz. It's no where as bad as posting someone's phone number on /b/ or anything." So, since it was not meant for information, and was not put as a subpage in their group to be utilized for their group, what other reason was it made for than to piss people off? He's done it before and several times. That make sense now? --Akule ^{School's in session.} 21:14, 6 September 2007 (BST)

Why are all their other subpage in the right place? I'll tell you (even though a quick look at the page histories would tell you)... I moved them. This page is in the same format as all of them used to be The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 00:50 7 September 2007 (BST)

So, since then, when the DEM basically took over the page (it's got their name on it and all) and he continued to revert their edits, that's not vandalism either? Just let me know if it's okay to go and make "factual pages" about other groups and misnaming them so that later on people could think that they were made as part of the group pages. --Akule ^{School's in session.} 01:06, 7 September 2007 (BST)

Nope, it isn't vandalism. DEM had no right to take over the page in the first place. --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 07:41, 7 September 2007 (BST)

That would probably be impersonation. In this case the Leighton Kru made sure that it was clear that it wasn't a DEM group page. Because the page is in the general namespace and not a group page there is no ownership of the page and everybody may edit it within the normal rules. If any group want's to exclude other users from editing it it should be in their group namespace, which it isn't. If there are any edit wars because of that, those should be solved in arbitration not here.-- Vista +1 09:47, 7 September 2007 (BST)

Beatboxer

image replacement corrupting a group page --Max Grivas ^{JG / M.F.T.} 12:24, 5 September 2007 (BST)

Funny, but he's still permabanned as an alt account, and the main warned for this The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 13:05 5 September 2007 (BST)

Son of a bitch, I clicked a link over there thinking it was like page histories and it apparently reverted something. So that might need fixing too.--Karek^maps?! 13:08, 5 September 2007 (BST)

Na, you fixed it. Try reloading, whenever I revert an image I keep getting the cached one I was trying to replace until I force a refresh The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 13:12 5 September 2007 (BST)

Yeah, that worked.--Karek^maps?! 13:13, 5 September 2007 (BST)

Yea

Yea (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss) here among many others. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 01:09, 5 September 2007 (BST)

Permabanned --The Grimch ^U! 01:12, 5 September 2007 (BST)

And his alt, User:Yeathesecond permabanned for vandalism and ban evasion --The Grimch ^U! 01:37, 5 September 2007 (BST)

Sexylegsread

Continued repeated uploading of deleted content. Please see below report for more details. --Bobs Aturd 03:30, 4 September 2007 (BST)

Banned for 24 hours. --The Grimch ^U! 03:32, 4 September 2007 (BST)

Darkmagic

Deleted discussion off another users talk page and flamed them --The Grimch ^U! 01:10, 4 September 2007 (BST)

Warned --Karlsbad 01:14, 4 September 2007 (BST)

I think it's time we ressurect the Witch Burners --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 01:16, 4 September 2007 (BST)

Studoku

Vandalized the PKer page. --Banana reads Scoundrell for all of Yesterday's News, Today! 21:23, 3 September 2007 (BST)

Warned --The Grimch ^U! 01:12, 4 September 2007 (BST)

BLooDCLotT

Used the top of the Crimson Clan front page as a talk page twice, ignoring my warning that I'd contact the administration. Check the CC history for proof. I see that BLooDCLotT is warned before, and ask that he is either warned again, or banned.Kris Eikehaug ^{Talk | The Clan} 21:03, 3 September 2007 (BST)

Im leaving a note on his talk page, but i wont warn him for it this time. If he does it again however, report it and action can be taken. I have to assume good faith, and that he just needs a sysop to sort him out. --The Grimch ^U! 01:19, 4 September 2007 (BST)

Matthewfarenheit

User:Matthewfarenheit/Sandbox/IP_Block_Log Listing users IPs on a public and easily accessible page. I am aware it is on a users subpage but checkuser information should not be made publicly available.--Karek^maps?! 14:12, 3 September 2007 (BST)

This is actually a rather massive violation of the UDwiki privacy policy, despite the lack of usernames attached. Its pretty easy to tell which are or were regular users by the year ban section. --The Grimch ^U! 14:20, 3 September 2007 (BST)

This was done with publicly available data wasn't it. He wasn't a sysop when the page was made, and I think it was Xoid that asked for someone to do it (for some reason I don't understand) The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 14:27 3 September 2007 (BST)

Xoid's request. Also from the privacy policy, "Where the user has been vandalising articles or persistently behaving in a disruptive way, data may be released to assist in the targeting of IP blocks...", seems to cover it The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 14:44 3 September 2007 (BST)

Hmm... I wasnt around then. Middle of my unplanned hiatus. Ah well. --The Grimch ^U! 14:53, 3 September 2007 (BST)

Thanks for keeping me updated about this case. All the information was recopilated by me when I wasn't a Sysop and from a public accessible log within the wiki. You guys really need to get busy. Sheesh! --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 14:21, 5 September 2007 (BST)

Sexylegsread

Uploaded Image:LOLZZZ.jpg (since A/SDed as a deletion workaround), which was a copy Image:Finis Valorum.jpg that had just been deleted half an hour before. Other troll like images uploaded as well, and his page quite clearly states that he "only really joined the Wiki to LOLZ! at the spastic that is,Finis Valorum" The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 12:24 3 September 2007 (BST)

Ill warn for this. Normally we assume good faith whoops, but this is clearly bad faith. --The Grimch ^U! 14:15, 3 September 2007 (BST)

Medico

Violation of suggestions rule 10. Such suggestions are considered vandalism. --The Grimch ^U! 08:45, 3 September 2007 (BST)

I thought it may have just been stoopid, until groins were mentioned, and then it just got worse! Warned The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 10:40 3 September 2007 (BST)

Unbreakableman

Created Suggestion:Pray, which cannot be considered a serious suggestion and therefore must be an attempt to be humourous, which is not allowed ~~on this wiki~~ in Suggestions. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 07:58, 3 September 2007 (BST)

Its a sock puppet. Im warning the user behind the sock puppet. im not exactly sure what to do about the sock puppet though. Ill leave it for now, though for the record, i am leaning towards banning it. --The Grimch ^U! 08:36, 3 September 2007 (BST)

Scout 2107

Don't know this is all about, but well... The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 14:36 2 September 2007 (BST)

Warned. Oh, he is going to be so thrilled thats its me. --The Grimch ^U! 23:34, 2 September 2007 (BST)

Grimaces Ass

Multiple vandalisms; check his contribs (no positive edits).--Jorm 07:02, 2 September 2007 (BST)

PENIS'd. You, mundane, might call it B&.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 07:07, 2 September 2007 (BST)

Lkjhuuyih

For this edit to the skills page. The only edit made by this user. - Whitehouse 21:26, 1 September 2007 (BST)

Warned The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 23:12 1 September 2007 (BST)

Gregg bayes

For this on the The Grenadier Guards page and this on the Rhodenbank Civil Defense Corps page. Naughty, Naughty. --Akule ^{School's in session.} 22:26, 31 August 2007 (BST)

Harmless fun. Still, I think it's worth a warning, is it not? --User:Axe27/Sig 22:33, 31 August 2007 (BST)

I would warn him, but seeing how old are these edits I looked into and seen that Boxy has already unofficialy warned him. I'll let him make the final ruling, as it's no sin to be lenient. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 23:01, 31 August 2007 (BST)

It is vandalism, but he's already been warned for it The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 00:26 1 September 2007 (BST)

Oh, BTW it was an official warning, back on the 11th of August The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 23:13 1 September 2007 (BST)

@@ Line 450: / Line 450: @@
 :::yeah... sorry. I'm kinda confused about how to remove suggestions. I thought that was what you did :( I didn't just remove the votes, I removed the whole thing to be revised on the Developing Suggestions page. I apologize. I can delete it if you want.
 Also, how should I have removed it? --[[User:Officer 123satsitx|Officer 123satsitx]] 02:22, 10 September 2007 (BST)
-:Next time, just put {{Removed}}
+:Next time, just put {{tl|Removed}}
 :on there, and sign it with something like "I've removed this suggestion to [[Talk:Suggestions]][[User:Nalikill|Nalikill]] 02:23, 10 September 2007 (BST)
 : Thanks,  and sorry again. I'll think twice before removing any suggestions I make. --[[User:Officer 123satsitx|Officer 123satsitx]] 02:45, 10 September 2007 (BST)

UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2007 09: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 02:09, 10 December 2008

Blood Panther and Zrex244

Suicidalangel and A Helpful Little Gnome

Seventythree and Nalikill

Navigation menu

Search