UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2007 08: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 09:10, 8 June 2010

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

DerFuhrer

That's yummy vandalism up in here.--Jorm 07:49, 31 August 2007 (BST)

More.--Jorm 07:50, 31 August 2007 (BST)

And vandal banning itself--Jorm 07:52, 31 August 2007 (BST)

I love the smell of efficient moderation in the morning. Smells like... victory. --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 07:59, 31 August 2007 (BST)

Actually, that was my dinner. Oh, and BAN'd.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 08:03, 31 August 2007 (BST)

Officer 123satsitx

Edited the Heathers group page (no action taken other than reverting) The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 14:14 30 August 2007 (BST)

Dug through most of his contribs, and while there is some vandalism, unfortunately for our evil sysop plans to permaban everyone, he actually made several contributive edits, providing information on a group page, presumably his, given how much he edits it (Digging back further there is even more conributions). Warned. --The Grimch ^Sysop-U! 23:20, 30 August 2007 (BST)

Also edited E.N.D.'s page twice when he is not a member of the group. I reverted. As an officer of E.N.D. I am -not- happy with this. --the one, the only, sushiknight ^{(talk contribs HARD E.N.D.)} 04:33, 31 August 2007 (BST)

Well, i cant do shit about that. he was warned after those events took place. You dont get one warning per issue of vandalism, you get one per report, and can only include stuff that happened after the last warning was issued. Long standing procedure here. If he does it again, file a report, until then, not much we can do. --The Grimch ^Sysop-U! 10:57, 31 August 2007 (BST)

Alright, thanks. I wasn't completely aware of the intricacies of the vandal banning system. I mainly just put this here to provide a more complete record. Thanks again. --the one, the only, sushiknight ^{(talk contribs HARD E.N.D.)} 15:50, 31 August 2007 (BST)

Utidcapaco

Deleting a profiles from a variety of different group pages and one user group here, here, here, here, here, here, and the user page here. By the past contributions of this user, this isn't the first time something like this has been attempted. --Banana reads Scoundrell for all of Yesterday's News, Today! 04:51, 30 August 2007 (BST)

Actually, all but his first edit to this wiki has been vandalism, and his first was a neutral edit, adding a couple of new terms to the zombie lexicon. Im going to perma him under Rule 3: The user has made at least 3 (three) edits, at least one of which is deemed vandalism, and none of which are deemed to be constructive or to the benefit of the majority of the wiki. Adding two phrases to a lexicon isnt constructive or beneficial to the community. Ill give another moderator until i get back from lunch to agree or disagree with this course of action before i go through with it. Ill be back in an hour. --The Grimch ^Sysop-U! 05:51, 30 August 2007 (BST)

Have you even tried warning him yet? Proper wiki form requires that much at least. He may simply be a new user who doesn't know the rules. Izumi Orimoto 06:04, 30 August 2007 (BST)

No mod objections? Matt? Utidcapaco Permabanned. Oh, and read the guidleines Izumi, i have asked you to do so in the past. --The Grimch ^Sysop-U! 07:10, 30 August 2007 (BST)

it's a little late but I would have agreed, his contributions showed he had no interest in being constructive - Vantar 03:42, 31 August 2007 (BST)

Byteme42

He then added an enter just between his comment and the link towards your userpage. This added to the fact that he didn't even include both the comment and the suposed "signature" on the same line, and that the supposed "signature" didn't even had a timestamp makes me believe that he was adressing to you, not really impersonating. Being a newbie is not vandalism. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 21:17, 28 August 2007 (BST)

Yes, but there were outside things that aren't noted here - specifically, he then went into our irc channel and attempted to impersonate an officer. This is most definitely vandalism, Mr. Celsius, despite whether or not you are inclined to mark it as such or not. Further, people do not typically address people using links to their pages, and addressing is done from the top. Further, the idea of a "bot" in our irc channel was not done with any permission or discussion with anyone. So this is a hostile act, and you are (as usual) trying to be a dick about things.--Jorm 21:27, 28 August 2007 (BST)

Stop being a dick yourself Jorm, it's just a ruling and the guy would get a warning at most. Anyways, by the edits I can get from this user (3) he seems to:

Be really new to wiki in general.
Ignore that 2 Intro strokes are necessary to write in another line when using wiki code.
Ignore wiki etiquette in general.

I'll have a word or two on his talk page about signing comments and such, but a warning would be unwarranted. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 21:47, 28 August 2007 (BST)

Dude, its textbook impersonation. Thats at LEAST a warning. And to think you were once against the mods being biased *rolls eyes*. Its clear you cant be impartial on anything that has anything to do with jorm. Id ask for another moderator to review the decision and make a verdict. I stand in opposition to Matt. --The Grimch ^Sysop-U! 10:10, 29 August 2007 (BST)

Less hypocrisy from you would be appreciated, Matt. --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 09:33, 29 August 2007 (BST)
I can see no other reason for putting Jorm's name after the comment other than to make it look like it was from him. Thus, impersonation.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 11:02, 29 August 2007 (BST)

If 2 Sysops think I'm wrong then I stand corrected, but personally I still think such an action would not constitute vandalism. IMHO it's all up to interpretation, and if the harsher interpretation suits you... Anyways, just don't start to be arrogant and power hungry, a lenient ruling isn't grounds for jumping over your companions. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 12:19, 29 August 2007 (BST)

I agree with them Matt, I was looking at it to give him the benefit of the doubt regarding his intentions, but can't see a reason to place a link to Jorms page there other than to make it look like Jorm made the post. Warn him (it's only a warning after all) The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 12:26 29 August 2007 (BST)

You werent being lenient Matt, you were saying what was done didnt count as vandalism, which it did as it was impersonation. Theres a fine but distinct difference between lenience for crimes and ignoring crimes. --The Grimch ^Sysop-U! 13:19, 29 August 2007 (BST)

So, is this guy gonna get a warning or is Matt going to conveniently "forget" to do so?--Jorm 19:32, 29 August 2007 (BST)

Byteme42 Warned. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 21:45, 29 August 2007 (BST)

XarmedCOMBATx

Vandalised Radio like so. -- Pavluk 23:22, 26 August 2007 (BST)

Permaban for him, and his alts;

Gung-Ho Gung-Ho (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
Sgt.Slaughter Sgt.Slaughter (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
Gibson352 Gibson352 (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
Thourgahst Thourgahst (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

All of them used to sign the petition against his spam. None have constructive contributions, all aimed at stirring up further drama The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 13:02 27 August 2007 (BST)

Dink

Dorked Help:Contents here, here, here, here, and here. -- Atticus Rex ^{mfu pif} Δ 22:13, 26 August 2007 (BST)

Also here and here. -- Atticus Rex ^{mfu pif} Δ 22:16, 26 August 2007 (BST)

Got it. Warned.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 22:20, 26 August 2007 (BST)

He's still at it thought - Vantar 22:46, 26 August 2007 (BST)

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but since his entire contribs history consists of repeatedly screwing with this page today -- despite repeated reverts -- isn't he worthy of a permaban? -- Atticus Rex ^{mfu pif} Δ 23:54, 26 August 2007 (BST)

It's rater odd, it doesn't looks like he is trying to do vandalism. I... think he has some kind of "issue" if you catch my drift. I'll ban him for some hours to inject some sense into his brain.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 00:02, 27 August 2007 (BST)

No, he's only promoting is group, not going all out trying to cause trouble. He's probably just new. The whole insta-ban thing needs to stop. Izumi Orimoto 00:05, 27 August 2007 (BST)

He's creating content just in the wrong space, so either he is malicious, or completely unaware of what he is doing wrong. The wording of the warning he has received may have not been clear enough for him to know what he did wrong, I would hold off baning him until you have talked with him - Vantar 00:05, 27 August 2007 (BST)

It's not a permaban guys, relax.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 00:07, 27 August 2007 (BST)

Yeah but how likely is he to comeback? - Vantar 00:08, 27 August 2007 (BST)

Bizkit66

Edited the Flowers of Disease] page despite being yet another member of the Cult of the Stuffed Crocodile, who are their enemies in-game The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 10:53 25 August 2007 (BST)

**cough** I took no action here, could someone give a ruling? The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 09:36 30 August 2007 (BST)

I refuse to do so until you start signing properly. You seriously need a dancing jesus or something like it. And indent like a bureaucrat for kevan's sake.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 09:48, 30 August 2007 (BST)

I lol'd. --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 09:57, 30 August 2007 (BST)

Many apologies overlord Thari! >:) boxy 10:07, 30 August 2007 (BST)

Im not touchin this. --The Grimch ^Sysop-U! 10:11, 30 August 2007 (BST)

Why not just rule "not vandalism"? Or whatever The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 13:51 30 August 2007 (BST)

Because it could go either way, and either way id get yelled at. By not touching it, i avoid getting yelled at. QED. --The Grimch ^Sysop-U! 02:52, 31 August 2007 (BST)

Not vandalism.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 03:09, 31 August 2007 (BST)

M4dD mUdD

Removed my comment. Made me cry. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 00:48, 25 August 2007 (BST)

Warned --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 03:41, 25 August 2007 (BST)

I'm sorry but the content was absolute and pure trolling. The comment in question wasn't even replied to, thus making such an action seem even more good faith. I don't want to pick a fight with anybody, even less with you Sonny, but I would have deleted the comment myself out of this community page as it brought no content but pure drama to the case. I strongly recommend this last warning to be retracted. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 03:55, 25 August 2007 (BST)

You cant just run around making judgement calls and deleting crap. While i agree what was deleted was utter drivel, if everyone went around deleting things they saw as crap, while others had different definitions of crap, we would have a massive drama monster on our hands. The safe route to take is to warn for all such occurences. At least then we can be internally consistent. If you had deleted it, and sonny had reported you, i would have been forced to give you a lovely little warning about it too. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 04:01, 25 August 2007 (BST)

Oh, and the above means the warning stands. Dont go deleting other peoples comments. As always, the best response to trolling is to ignore it. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 04:02, 25 August 2007 (BST)

No wonder there's so many winners that make such excellent use of the wiki bureaucracy it's not like you guys encourage it or anything. How about a consistant no douche bag policy? It works in alot of very public boards that I happen to mod for why not the wiki as well?--Kristi of the Dead 04:09, 25 August 2007 (BST)

Well, because the first step of a no douchebag policy would involve banning 90% of the wiki population, for starters, and those left would be lurkers, and kevan, whom i would imagine would feel very alone. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 04:23, 25 August 2007 (BST)

Congrats, Grim. You just managed to insult every single person who edits this wiki. Did you ever wonder why reasonable folks are leaving in droves whilst the asshats remain?

And while I'm here, can we get a review of this action? At least one sysop disagrees with the warning. -- Atticus Rex ^{mfu pif} Δ 04:28, 25 August 2007 (BST)

Um, i am not the first person to put forward this theory. Every single person has been at some point in their time here, a douchebag. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 04:52, 25 August 2007 (BST)

I see. Someone else said it first, therefore it must be true. Or a "theory" misstated as fact, whichever. I think the collected evidence to prove the validity of your statement would make for interesting reading. I also think it'd be interesting to hear how you're reluctant to allow anyone to define "trolling", but you're okay with tossing out your own iron-clad definition of "douchebag". And then applying it en masse to the entire community you put your hand up to serve. Why don't you try working with concepts that are easier to grasp, like hypocrisy? -- Atticus Rex ^{mfu pif} Δ 05:25, 25 August 2007 (BST)

I did nothing of the sort. I didnt say it was absolutely true because someone else said it, nor did i imply it. I also did not define douchebag. Also, unless i am actually doing something moderatory, im just a regular user, and allowed to say whatever the hell i like, so long as it doesnt threaten to use my mod abilities. I just said that as a generalisation, a lot of people would be tossed for being douchebags if a rule against douchebaggery were introduced. Sufficient at the least to depopulate the wiki significantly. It would also decimate the freedom of speech here. This is a bad thing, by the way. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 09:50, 25 August 2007 (BST)

I'll repeat myself: The deletion of that trollish comment on this page entirely dedicated to vandal reports wasn't at all vandalism. This is different than deleting a whole vote because you didn't like the content or deleting just the part of a signed comment as a form of censorship. Please retract the warning or a Misconduct case would be mandatory. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 04:25, 25 August 2007 (BST)

And i will reiterate: You cannot arbitrarily decide what is and what isnt trolling. If you allow the deletion of trolling from a page, you will have hundreds of edit wars flare up in short order where people declare anything they disagree with trolling. As it has already been established in previous cases, being an arsehole isnt against the rules. It is,, however, a simple rule that you do not delete other peoples comments, no matter how stupid or trollish they may be. If someone is trolling you, take them to arbitration, where, hopefully, the system will resolve the matter. If all else fails: Ignore it, and they will go looking for someone else more likely to bite the hook. And with regards to misconduct: Bring it on bitch. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 04:52, 25 August 2007 (BST)

Someone's feelinz iz hurt and lookin' fer some payback.--Jorm 04:55, 25 August 2007 (BST)

In response to the review requested by Atticus Rex I would have ruled this in a similar manor. While the comment removed was unneeded and offensive to some. It was wrong for it to be removed. The rules are rather clear on this. I would have also had a word with Sonny Corleone about if he felt his comment was helpful/in good faith/ needed but still a warning for removing comments would have been inorder - Vantar 05:39, 25 August 2007 (BST)

First off, your mom jokes are pure fucking shit. If you take one seriously, fucking die...like now. They're horrible. I was making fun of his argument "it should be deleted", as if that gave him the right to blank the page. But my whole point is, he had no right to remove it. Sure it was stupid, but he didn't have to blank it. And Matt, let's not go over censorship again. I hear the Darkest Faerie is in Altador...that could topple you from your throne in the Faerieland... --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 05:49, 25 August 2007 (BST)

Thanks, Vantar. -- Atticus Rex ^{mfu pif} Δ 05:54, 25 August 2007 (BST)

Thanks Vantar. In other news, i am still waiting for Matthew Fahrenheit to show some balls and back up his bark with some bite. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 06:03, 25 August 2007 (BST)

He won't because he has no argument besides being butthurt over the Faerie Queen thing which was like in...January... --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 06:05, 25 August 2007 (BST)

So you mean my ruling against him in a recent misconduct case and warning him has nothing to do with it? --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 06:28, 25 August 2007 (BST)

That has to do with it too. But he would have probably ignored this case if it wasn't made by me. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 06:29, 25 August 2007 (BST)

Soooo, who's going to report me for this... or point to a policy that gives sysops more of a right to remove off topic comments from community pages? This removal seems similar to someone removing crap from a suburb page current events section to me. You're being a fucking cry baby about this, Sonny, you spouted shit here, trying to stir up drama (well done btw), and then went crying to the mods when someone removed your absolute drivel The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 10:12 25 August 2007 (BST)

Just thought I'd take the time to say I really, really don't like The Grimch. (Not that many people do.)Izumi Orimoto 03:14, 26 August 2007 (BST)

He's a mean one, that Mr. Grimch.--Jorm 03:23, 26 August 2007 (BST)

I never claimed to be nice. Im not required to be. I am, however, fair. And you would be suprised how many people like me, and just how little my popularity (Good or bad) actually bothers me. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 05:21, 26 August 2007 (BST)

M4dD mUdD

twice- Vantar 00:09, 25 August 2007 (BST)

Warned.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 00:12, 25 August 2007 (BST)

Page should be deleted --M4dD mUdD 00:29, 25 August 2007 (BST)

Then put it up for Deletion, you are not allowed to just remove content like that - Vantar 01:07, 25 August 2007 (BST)

It was put up there before and had epic fails. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF pr0n} 01:26, 25 August 2007 (BST)

When? The page was created less than 2 weeks ago if it had ever been up for deletion it would still be under voting. There was some talk on the Speedy delete page about whether a new criterion was needed to cover such a page but i don't think that ever turned into anything- Vantar 01:36, 25 August 2007 (BST)

Grim s

Personally insulted me in a suggestion, and cursed at me, as is against any rule I can think of. He can be an asshole about the suggestion, but not about me personally. Nalikill 20:54, 24 August 2007 (BST)

I said "Get the fuck out of suggestions!" (Exact quote). Thats not insulting you. Thats giving you directions. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 21:00, 24 August 2007 (BST)

That's insulting me. That's either 1: Giving me an order YOU HAVE NO POWER TO GIVE, even as a sysop I had the right ot get that voted on. So "worthless and unjustified" on that count, and you should've clarified that after I edited it the first time, that it was just you being a jerk about THE SUGGESTION and not me. Or 2: Insulting me, by saying I ain't good enough to write suggestions. So again: worthless, unjustified, and in this case, paramount to vandalism. Nalikill 21:03, 24 August 2007 (BST)

Well, if you think i was giving it as a moderator, why not go all the way and take this to Misconduct? Regardless, being an arsehole is not a crime on this wiki, or we would have banned two thirds of the population by now. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 21:08, 24 August 2007 (BST)

I've taken it to Arbitration. You will, of course, not be arbitrating, I presume? I had been hoping you would simply accept my editing out of your gratuitous language, since the gist and even every single point you made were still there, unedited, but I guess a child as young as yourself isn't emotionally ready to be mature. I am, of course, referring to mental age, not actual age, so you could be methuselah, and my statement still holds true. Nalikill 21:16, 24 August 2007 (BST)

AFAIK, there's no rule against insults. Or telling people to GTFO.--Jorm 21:16, 24 August 2007 (BST)

It's true that there's no enforced rules against insults. But a little wiki-lawyering reveals "Flaming and/or Trolling will not be tolerated" from Template:SugVoteRules and 'we define Vandalism as "an edit not made in a good-faith attempt to improve this wiki"' from UDWiki:Vandalism. So insulting people = thin ice. In theory. -- T 22:46, 24 August 2007 (BST)

I withdraw my report, this is being handled in Arbitration. Nalikill 21:27, 24 August 2007 (BST)

Not that you had a leg to stand on in the first place. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 22:25, 24 August 2007 (BST)

Correct, being an arsehole isn't against the rules.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 22:44, 24 August 2007 (BST)

Nalikill

Edited my vote on his suggestion. While i may be an arsehole (Im have freely admitted as much on many occasions), we have a grand tradition of attacking other people on the suggestions page when they make suggestions so utterly gamebreaking that simple spam just isnt enough to convey how much the suggestion is loathed. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 20:46, 24 August 2007 (BST)

He did it again --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 20:51, 24 August 2007 (BST)

Hell, its not even an insult. Im just telling him to get out of suggestions. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 20:53, 24 August 2007 (BST)

Technically vandalism, but at the same time I'm not sure that sporting the badge of arsehole is terribly healthy (in the broadest sense) either : ) --Barbecue Barbecue 21:37, 24 August 2007 (BST)

Warned.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 22:32, 24 August 2007 (BST)

HAHA_I_OWNED_U

Permban, only contribution is major vandalism of the Heathers page The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 15:32 24 August 2007 (BST)

Scinfaxi is a racist cunt

While i'm sure many of us share the sentiment, it's still vandalism. Permabanned.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 12:41, 24 August 2007 (BST)

Austin the editor

Just some guy out there erasing everything he can find apparently. Here's an example here What a loser --8 Bucks 01:20, 24 August 2007 (BST)

He is yiffing in hell now.--Thari^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 02:14, 24 August 2007 (BST)

You've accidentally linked to a page in the main namespace rather than his user page. Link fixed, page put up for speedy deletion.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 12:41, 24 August 2007 (BST)

Hawkname

Stupidflowerpower vandalised the Flowers of Disease page. Checkuser indicates it is an alt account of Hawkname. I've permbanned Stupidflowerpower, but taken no action against Hawkname The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 14:24 23 August 2007 (BST)

Hawkname should also be permabanned as per previous precident concerning alt accounts.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 05:18, 24 August 2007 (BST)

Ahh yes, i remember that. In a fit a anger i vandalised the page before reverting it back to original after feeling evil. However next day i found myself dead again, by these pkers and gained courage by seeing some other guy vandalise it. Looks like ya got me. Anyway, wont it follow this rule? if a user continues to vandalise the wiki after being warned not to, they get a second warning. If, after that warning, the vandalism continues, then we are forced to ban the user for 24 hours from editing the wiki. This is recorded in the Block log, but other than that we try not to draw much more attention to the ban than this. If, after being banned, the user returns to the wiki and chooses to help improve the wiki, we will not press the issue further. If they continue, however, they will be banned for longer periods, as follows:

   * First ban: 24 hours
   * Second ban: 48 hours
   * Third ban: 1 week
   * Fourth ban: 1 month
   * Fifth ban: 1 year

applies for a second warning if you count the first charge--hawkname

Yes, but there is plenty of precedent which allows us to permaban vandals who have made no other positive contributions to the wiki. I will, however, give you what shall count as your second warning on the grounds that are aware of what you did wrong and shall hopefully not do it again.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 11:41, 24 August 2007 (BST)

Right then, thank you --hawkname

Raptor jesus b

Redirected the Flowers of Disease page to his own group, and earlier changed their group image to one of his own. An earlier edit shows that they arn't affiliated The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 16:02 22 August 2007 (BST)

Well, the only room for judgement here is if this has to be a warning or a permaban. I'll be lenient and grant the warning, but as he looks as the kind of guy that annoys people on purpose just for fun, this may become a permaban in the immediate future if he shows no signs of respecting other people's pages. Warned. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 06:33, 23 August 2007 (BST)

ololol ?! Raptor jesus is not part of b/. He redirected the Flowers of Disease page to our page, but we had nothing to do with that.--IoOI 19:29, 23 August 2007 (BST)

DEM Roster

We have posted the DEM Roster as a resource to be accessed by all, however it has already endured frequent unauthorised changes. Until we have agreed on an actual DEM member who can be relied upon to update the Roster accurately and without making changes to Leighton Kru input, we see all alterations as Vandalism, as it was posted by the Leighton Kru, accessed through the Leighton Kru's wiki, and with the intent of only being altered by the Leighton Kru. Can something be done by all the attempts to change or alter the information provided so far? -Gregg Bayes

Ah, no. See at the bottom of the edit box where 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."? This isn't your user page, it isn't your group page, and you don't even have a claim to the information therein. Unless, of course, it was your intent to report your own vandalism, reverting our helpful updates, in which case by all means, carry on. -- Atticus Rex ^{mfu pif} Δ 16:12, 22 August 2007 (BST)

If it's to be a resource to be accessed by all, then it should be NPOV, not filled with your own brand of propaganda. If it's to be a community page, who are you to say what changes are unauthorised just because they're removing your POV bullshite? You want want to make a page with that on it, do it on your own group page (or a sub-page of it). You can't have it both ways, claiming it's a community resource, and then demanding exclusive rights to what goes up there.

Not vandalism The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 16:15 22 August 2007 (BST)

If you take the time to look, it's not just how we've introduced the page that has been changed, but also the information contained within (http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=DEM_Roster&diff=788953&oldid=788937). So it's going to be a pretty useless community resource when all the names mentioned are changed, locations are made up, and irrelevant information is added in attempt to sabotage the information displayed. So no boxy, it's not just our "POV Bullshite" as you professionally put it that's being changed, its the entire point of putting the bloody thing up in the first place. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gregg bayes (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

We are just trying to help! Alex (DeWitt) was nice enough to let DivComm officers mess around with the roster a bit, custom names and such, since every division has a separate roster already. P4X and I did most of the editing right away, since we're good with HTML and roster work to begin with. Any spies you might still have wouldn't know this, because they aren't DivComms. (And don't try to say they are, all our DivComm officers pre-date your group being formed) Its' still plenty helpful, "Co-Dictators of the SW" Hmm, I wonder what they do? Could they possibly be the ones who run the SW?--Labine50 ^MHG|MEMS 19:22, 22 August 2007 (BST)

Qwertyjf

General idiocy here, here, here, here, and here. --Banana reads Scoundrell for all of Yesterday's News, Today! 21:26, 21 August 2007 (BST)

Permabanned --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 21:49, 21 August 2007 (BST)

West Boundwood

The background to the West Boundwood page was edited by a member of new group the Warriors to refer positively to their group... he also slagging off other groups in their news reporting, but we don't think that's so bad, and have added further subtle counter reports ;). We also reverted the background.... if anyone thinks any of this is bad, please let us know! (We've also contacted the player)--Crabappleslegalteam 02:13, 20 August 2007 (BST)

I don't see his edits as bad faith or anything. While his news reporting skills are really POV (altough I understand that it's because he is roleplaying it) his additions to the background were quite NPOV and flavourish, aside for the lil' bits of propaganda. You can always take a look at the Ridleybank background and understand that it's just a subproduct of RRF's propaganda as well, but that just adds to the flavour. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 04:11, 20 August 2007 (BST)

Oh, a ruling! Not vandalism. Have a chat with him if you want, but try to resolve this on your own and don't censure him if he is truly willing to contribute NPOVish to the page. After all, it was mostly flavour. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 04:50, 20 August 2007 (BST)

It's amazing what you can do with a bit of flavour.... we can think of at least 1 user who has added communist flavour to about 6 suburbs.... if he was just playing a game, we probably wouldn't mind.... anyway, this all seems a lot looser than the Gage regime... actually, we weren't really reporting this as vandalism - just explaining the situation, in case it escalates, and here seems as good a place as any. We're waiting for a response from him for discussion. Thanks for your time!--Crabappleslegalteam 01:59, 21 August 2007 (BST)

Crabappleslegalteam, as an official word, the ruling is as it is because this is not Vandal Banning material but Arbitration one. Even if this guy edits were a lot more POVish, I couldn't rule him out unless it's some sort of special case. If you engage on an edit war, it's always for the worst, so my best advice is to evade that and chat this through with him. Also, my brother is a bit of a communist himself (trotskist, if that's how you say it in English) and he has left a mark on me as well, so your example kinda rebounded =P. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 05:05, 21 August 2007 (BST)

It's only arbitration material if it needed an arbitration - really, this was just a preliminary aside, and we just wanted to write a little note to say what we were doing, and here seemed as good as anywhere..... just a little tiny.... and we never actually accused anyone of..... and we've been in a good few..... and we invited a....and it doesn't matter if you're.... and we've already said.... 'sigh'. anyway, it seems more or less resolved.... sorry to take up your time, Mr. Judge sir!--Crabappleslegalteam 01:35, 22 August 2007 (BST)

User:Austeko3rs

Took six edits to end up with this when it should have taken one. If you're going to vandalize stupidly, at least be efficient about it.

Warned --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 00:27, 19 August 2007 (BST)

He's at it again. Reverting now.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 00:53, 19 August 2007 (BST)

Permabanned --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 01:01, 19 August 2007 (BST)

User:Dialga

For these "clever" and "subtle" modifications.

Warned --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 00:27, 19 August 2007 (BST)

Windfall

I'm not sure how to post this... WINDFALL changed information on THE QUARTLEY BUILDING in FRYERBANK, posting misinformation about my group, etc. I was under the impression this was against the rules. Please respond on my comment page. --CalvintheAXE 02:35, 17 August 2007 (BST)

Take it to Arbitration and sort this out there, instead of having your budding edit war. Both are highly POV, and location pages are supposed to be NPOV. Im tempted to warn you both. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 09:24, 17 August 2007 (BST)

This issue was resolved peacefully. --CalvintheAXE 22:50, 17 August 2007 (BST)

See what happens when you really try to work things out? --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 23:18, 17 August 2007 (BST)

Timbob

Seems he vandalized the Final Resistance [1] page a few months back. Of course since I've barely been on the page except to give some quick updates I have failed to notice it until today. Is there some stature of limitations on Vandalism or not? --Rogue 13:59, 16 August 2007 (BST)

Warned --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 18:12, 16 August 2007 (BST)

Edit, no one filed reports back then as to why he was banned for 24 hours, as such i cannot tell if he was warned already for that particular bit of vandalism. As such, i will leave a third warning on his page but take no other action, rather than ban him. Get your shit together guys *glares at Cyberbob and TheGeneral. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 18:18, 16 August 2007 (BST)

IsoJb

Edited the Leighton Kru wiki page to say 'Mens balls are tasty' without permission and without being a member of Leighton Kru. Assuming he did this because of an in-game attack on his UD group. Vandalising our wiki page to this extent however is unacceptable. --user:MattyC-- 13:09 16/08/2007 GMT

Warned The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 13:23 16 August 2007 (BST)

Ruming

Blanked the Mad Craskers and all their subpages. Edits have been rolled back and vandal has been permabanned. He also, a while ago, blanked the Category:Groups page, but fixed it himself. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 09:25, 16 August 2007 (BST)

Shinobu

Sorry to bug you guys again, but this edit of my user page is, um, offensive, no?--Lachryma^☭ 03:24, 15 August 2007 (BST)

Oh relax! I was only having a little fun! Nothing else to do here, so whats a little prank between friends?Shinobu 03:37, 15 August 2007 (BST)

I didn't think it was funny. Or nice. Or even a 'little prank'. So no, I don't think I'll relax.--Lachryma^☭ 03:42, 15 August 2007 (BST)

Why?Shinobu 03:43, 15 August 2007 (BST)

...Cuz it was offensive and degrading? Maybe?--Lachryma^☭ 03:50, 15 August 2007 (BST)

Really? How so? Shinobu 04:01, 15 August 2007 (BST)

It might be with you modifying her self description to be a prostitute and a racist, using highly offensive terms. But that's just a feeling I have, it may be totally and completely wrong but somehow I doubt it.--Karek^maps?! 04:07, 15 August 2007 (BST)

I don't understand, I'm sorry. I joke like this with my friends and they never get offended.Shinobu 04:11, 15 August 2007 (BST)

First off, I don't know you. Second, you don't edit other people's user pages. By doing that, it looked like I was saying that stuff. Third, call your girlfriend, or your mom (or any female relative or friend) a prostitute, and ask them how many people licked their 'sexy-button' then watch how they respond. That's not even getting into the racist feth you put onto my page.--Lachryma^☭ 04:18, 15 August 2007 (BST)

Totally bad faith. In fact, pretty much the definition.--Jorm 04:22, 15 August 2007 (BST)

Warned, and think yourself lucky it's not a ban, you've contributed nothing but crap and drama so far The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 04:38 15 August 2007 (BST)

Thanks, mister.--Lachryma^☭ 05:37, 15 August 2007 (BST)

Elbowhead

He fethed with a subpage of my user page, repeatedly. Said subpage is a joke that I haven't glanced at/edited since February, but I care not. Don't touch my stuff!--Lachryma^☭ 00:12, 15 August 2007 (BST)

Warning. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 03:14, 15 August 2007 (BST)

ZeroTwo

Deleted a lot of other people's postings on Shore Hills page under the pretext of keeping it clean. I hope you will consider reverting those changes. Many thanks. -- JohnRubin 21:03, 14 August 2007 (BST)

I am recovering it from history and moving it to the talk page, and leaving a note on his talk page to move discussions to talk pages in future instead of deleting them. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 21:48, 14 August 2007 (BST)

Ah screw it. The comments are on topic and way too short to warrant removal to talk pages. im just going to revert it to the previous good version and ask him not to do it again or face a warning. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 21:52, 14 August 2007 (BST)

Thanks a million! --JohnRubin 08:35, 15 August 2007 (BST)

Al duck

Spammed lots of group talk pages (look at his contribs) with a preset ad to persuade them to join his crusade. Precedent says that over a dozen of such ads are considered vandalism. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 18:39, 13 August 2007 (BST)

Well, he stopped when i told him to cut it out. Ill update my quit it message to include a warning. Some other mod can volenteer to roll it all back. --Grim s-^U! 18:43, 13 August 2007 (BST)

Death Doggy

This user has posted several apparently false News reports to at least three suburb pages: West_Grayside, Buttonville and Williamsville. You will also notice from the edit histories on the West Grayside page that edits were made on 11 August, even though news articles are dated differently. User also changed suburb danger levels without justification on the West Grayside page and possibly the other pages as well. Please investigate. Thank you. --WanYao 11:32, 12 August 2007 (BST)

I can testify his info about West Grayside is completely false. All this fellow's done in his short career so far is ring alarm bells. Italus 16:20, 12 August 2007 (BST)

His tinkering with the formerly green havercroft just became very, very real though :P . I dont think theres a rule against being an idiot on this wiki (Or half the population would have been banned during the Drama Ages, and the other half wouldnt have noticed). Ill go and tell him to calm down on his talk page, and to not fiddle with the danger reports until he gets some more experience under his belt. Everyone happy? No? Well tough shit. Im still a mod, despite my occasionaly unexplained months long absences and my removal of the mod tag from my sig. Enjoy :D --Grim s-^U! 16:56, 12 August 2007 (BST)

"No? Well tough shit. Im still a mod" -- wow, how professional. How mature.... No seriously, I filed a simple report/complaint. I filed it politely and reasonably... and you pull attitude and swear at us, etc., etc. Wonderful..... Well, whatever, I'm not making a big deal of it... Have a nice life. --WanYao 20:42, 12 August 2007 (BST)

Calm down man, Grim (A.K.A God, and not that silly Amazing alt God, but the real God) is just messing with you. Or not. :P.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 00:01, 13 August 2007 (BST)

Incredible. You managed to completely miss my attempts at humour (And, indeed, construe them as something else entirely, despite the little emotes and everything). Perhaps you want the (more) evil me back. The one who would flame at will and continuously be sarcastic. Grow a sense of humour you. --Grim s-^U! 09:02, 13 August 2007 (BST)

Wow.... I just lost about half of my hope in this wiki. Italus 14:28, 14 August 2007 (BST)

Hmm, just ran an IP check, and it seems this guy is three users, Im just not entirely sure if im actually allowed to name them. Been a while. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 14:57, 14 August 2007 (BST)

Glad to have you back, grim. Indeed, there is no rule against stupidity, or you and i would have been banned a long time ago grim. :) There is also no rule against having multiple users in the wiki, as long as you dont use them as sockpuppets in voting processes. You can only (and should) name them when the user is punished for vandalism, in which case its not the right time. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 15:07, 14 August 2007 (BST)

Actually, as far as I know, there are no rules about naming sockpuppets at all. Only about exposing IP's. naming other accounts is left to your own judgement. In fact I'm for making multiple accounts public as there are forms of vandalism whose discovery is dependend on knowing that a single user is behind those accounts.-- Vista +1 15:17, 14 August 2007 (BST)

The reason i asked is because he seems to have changed nicks every couple of hours and continued doing the same thing. With the last one it was some knowingly false information on a suburb page, and an edit of someone else suburb report to completely reverse its meaning. Use the check and look up his latests diffs and have a look for yourselves. --The Grimch ^Mod-U! 16:03, 14 August 2007 (BST)

Axemaster and Alchemist blocked. IP's are the same, and a couple of examples of verifying their own false reports. Well spotted Grimch The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 16:14 14 August 2007 (BST)

Opps, forgot to give a warning to this account for this. Warned The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 09:37 16 August 2007 (BST)

Hejsa

She doesn't. A fellow group member (Nuero) asked on the AMS forum if someone would come place a vote for him, and she didn't understand that would be a no-no. -- Atticus Rex ^{mfu pif} Δ 07:31, 12 August 2007 (BST)

Ah, so thats why she used her(?) account, but a different name. Someone should tell Nuero to make his own. The wiki is teh cool anywayz.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 07:42, 12 August 2007 (BST)

That's a fair response. Good to know that it isn't malicious.--Jorm 07:50, 12 August 2007 (BST)

I've had a word on her talk page, but not vandalism unless it happens again The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 07:52 12 August 2007 (BST)

Gregg bayes

For this on the BAR page. --Gut stench ^{FU BAR} 22:47, 10 August 2007 (BST)

Warned - and I notice that he's done it to a number of other pages as well, but gone unreported The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 01:34 11 August 2007 (BST)

Slift

For adding on to the page Annun created, which I remind you was for vandal intents only.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 15:40, 10 August 2007 (BST)

He has recreated the page. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{^{^{^{^{#nerftemplatedsigs}}}}} 15:51, 10 August 2007 (BST) Whoops...wrong one...I meant to put this in the one underneath... --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{^{^{^{^{#nerftemplatedsigs}}}}} 15:53, 10 August 2007 (BST)

Annun

First edit, second, third, fourth, probably will be more once I'm done. I've reverted all of it so far, but eh...I'm getting sleepy.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 15:22, 10 August 2007 (BST)

Warned --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 15:26, 10 August 2007 (BST)

And he now created a new DARIS page, for vandal intent only.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 15:34, 10 August 2007 (BST)

Second Warning then, and the page is deleted The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 15:47 10 August 2007 (BST)

Banned for 24h - Constant vandalism. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 15:56, 10 August 2007 (BST)

Captain Grisum

If not vanadalism, then his "maintenance work" on the recruitment page seems oddly selective in its interpretation of the rules. Some ads with recent dates (under 2 weeks) deleted, and a few with older dates (much over 2 weeks) were not. _Δ^‌_Δ Swiers 02:59, 10 August 2007 (BST)

Does changing date to a month older one even count as "maintenance"? --~~~~_T^''' 08:41, 10 August 2007 (BST)

I was going to report this as well. He changed the timestamp of many groups to older dates, including mine from august 4th to july 11th, leaving it vulnerable to anyone doing real maintenance. I say this is vandalism, whatever work he did was just a cover for it (took me longer to find the responsible for this because of it). I also suggest that time entries not be deleted in the next two weeks to compensate for whoever got attacked by this without noticing it early enough. -Certified=Insane^☭

00:14, 11 August 2007 (BST)

It seems clear that he edited from an older version of the page. Intentional or not, I can't say, but that's the kind of thing a newb might do -- of course, the big bold Warning at the top of the edit block should have been a clue. But yeah, no one should have their ads deleted for the next two weeks. -- Atticus Rex ^{mfu pif} Δ 00:52, 11 August 2007 (BST)

If the "selective" messing with other groups entries had a pattern to it, I may think it was deliberate... but it seems like a newb mistake (all be it a very painful one to clean up) when trying to edit the page. If he does it again, then yeah, but I'm ruling not vandalism this time The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 01:44 11 August 2007 (BST)

Looking at it again, it seems Atticus is right- noob mistake, although a seasoned user like that should know better. Still, it explains why so many groups went missing or had altered content / dates- he didn't delete them, he reverted to an old version where they never existed. Still, its a metric bears ass to fix once others have come alonf and edited on top of a cock-up like that. Hopefully the posting guideline overhaul I;ve got in the pipeline with make using the page easier for noobs (or force them to learn a bit before they use it, so they are not so noobish) and will also make such damage easier to fix. _Δ^‌_Δ Swiers 03:30, 11 August 2007 (BST)

If I did something to change anyone elses page it was unintentional. I have been keeping an eye on Infected Swarm pages due to being vandalized. I found our recruitment page missing when I checked on it and was looking to see what had happened and then attempted to restore it.

Captain Grisum 14:00 14 August 2007

You can't "revert" a page after multiple people have edited it; that undoes all the work those people did in good faith as well as the "work" the vandal did. Fixing damage of this nature (reversion) Is then almost impossible when people come along and edit the reverted version in good faith- you get an edit fork.
The good thing to come out of this is I was so annoyed at how hard it was to fix, I wrote new guidelines for recruitment advertising that will make this sort of thing easier to fix in the future. You might want to check them out, because they also tell you how to make your ad (or at least its contents) "vandal proof".

Swiers 03:53, 15 August 2007 (BST)

Zapmen the dead

He did this to Driaquer's user page. I undid it. --Evildemon989 ^{Talk · Help · W! · P! · SU! · TJ! · Hai!} 21:45, 9 August 2007 (BST)

He also did this. I undid it, but I wasn't sure if I should of. --Evildemon989 ^{Talk · Help · W! · P! · SU! · TJ! · Hai!} 22:01, 9 August 2007 (BST)

And he's done a lot more since then. Fixing it as we speak.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 23:25, 9 August 2007 (BST)

I'm permabanning him for his mischief, though if the Fear thing ends up not being vandalism he may not be a Criterion 3 of the "When an user may be warned or banned" Guidelines per se, so any Sysop that wants to revert the ban please do so if you have a reason. Anyways, he doesn't look like the everyday contributive user, does he? --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 23:42, 9 August 2007 (BST)

Jaw breaker

Edited Philosophe Knight's kill list to remove himself, then remove everyone else from it in a second edit. --♥Hana^{T•Z•S•W!•C} 13:54, 9 August 2007 (BST)

Warned. Very close to being b&, with multiple bad faith edits to a couple of pages The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 14:20 9 August 2007 (BST)

He did it again! Don't worry. I reverted it. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{^{^{^{^{#nerftemplatedsigs}}}}} 15:29, 9 August 2007 (BST)

Warning #2, guess what's next The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 15:40 9 August 2007 (BST)

King Sausage

Edited out his (and his friends, presumably) entries in the Dulston Alliance Blacklist The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 13:04 7 August 2007 (BST)

Warned.-- Vista +1 13:10, 7 August 2007 (BST)

Hagnat

Deleted my vote. Apparently now hagnat has the right to decide which opinions can be heard and makes up rules that don't exist.Jjames 05:36, 7 August 2007 (BST)

I am going to take a bath, and when i return i am going to perma-ban Jjaxi. Anyone against it ? --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 05:40, 7 August 2007 (BST)

That's against all posted rules. And you can't ban scinfaxi for something I post. We are two different posters.Jjames 05:42, 7 August 2007 (BST)

About the vote deletion, it might be a little rough and I do not approve it against any user but sockpuppets, but about the banning part... you were screaming for it since forever Jjames. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 05:46, 7 August 2007 (BST)

EDIT: altough a banned user may have no right to vote, heh. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 05:47, 7 August 2007 (BST)

What?! I have broken no rule. I've never even been warned. How can you ban someone who not only isn't currently breaking the rules, but hasn't in the past? If you don't like the rules, change them, but don't selectively enforce them.Jjames 05:50, 7 August 2007 (BST)

Every one of your edits since your come back have been bad faith to the letter, and that's ignoring your past edits. That they're not impersonation nor you are deleting somebody edits or commiting some other sort of obvious vandalism doesn't make you a saint. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 05:54, 7 August 2007 (BST)

Check your talk page again, Jjamesfaxi. Hagnat(?) warned you on one of the newer topics. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{^{^{^{^{#nerftemplatedsigs}}}}} 05:54, 7 August 2007 (BST)

Jjames was perma banned from this wiki. This old dinosaur from the Drama ages seem to have not learnt anything in the several months he spent away from this community. Since his return, a few days ago, his edits were nothing but harrasment, most of them asking users from this wiki to commit suicide. This is a clear violation of Item 3, from our When a user may be warned or banned policy. So long, Jjaxi, and thank you for the fishes --hagnat 06:01, 7 August 2007 (BST)

Adittional comments moved to the talk page. Let's keep this administrational page a bit cleaner guys. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 06:14, 7 August 2007 (BST)

Sexmachine

Permabanned. Now I must take a bath... or three. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 20:26, 6 August 2007 (BST)

CharIieChaplan

Vandalized the BMC page by adding a fake entry in the groups section for honouring former members. Suspected to be an account of Nuke Texas, whom the fake entry is about.

- Whitehouse 15:45, 6 August 2007 (BST)

The I.P. shows no alternate account and the name Nuke Texas is not used by a user on this wiki. So it's a warning. -- Vista +1 15:51, 6 August 2007 (BST)

KingMe

Undid Zombie Slay3rs original undo. --User:Axe27/Sig 05:05, 3 August 2007 (BST)

He seems to want to sort through the entire page, and leave only what he thinks is good. The history of the page shows that.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 09:59, 3 August 2007 (BST)

Protections,much? --User:Axe27/Sig 19:12, 3 August 2007 (BST)

Not vandalism - for gods sake, at least try talking to the guy first, before bring edit conflicts on community pages here The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 03:20 5 August 2007 (BST)

Another case was ruled against this user for the same reasons, but now we have an edit conflict. Archive whatever he delete (most of the stuff he deleted really are not fun at all), or move it to arbitration (please, dont). --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 07:00, 6 August 2007 (BST)

I don't think Kamden will. I personally agree with a lot of what he removed, but I still think Skullduggery is a better title than plain 'ole Skulls.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 07:16, 6 August 2007 (BST)

Captin of ZS

kmhmmm I'm not sure he did this in good faith... -- goebi o o o o o o o o o 14:47, 2 August 2007 (BST)

Yeah. Anyhow, I reverted the edits back to the original version.Can we get a mod on this? --User:Axe27/Sig 22:21, 2 August 2007 (BST)

Warned - no editing other people's group pages. Use the talk page if you want to contact/taunt them The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 03:29 5 August 2007 (BST)

Tony Darkgrave

Deleting people's votes from the page: 1, after i've restored them he did it again --~~~~_T^{` `} 08:58, 2 August 2007 (BST)

Warned. --

^T 17:45, 2 August 2007 (BST)

Muhagabaga

He edited LUE's page, insulting them or something. It's not quite vandalism, but it sorta is...--Lachryma^☭ 20:02, 1 August 2007 (BST)

Bah, edit conflicted me on that one. >:(.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 20:04, 1 August 2007 (BST)

Warned.-- Vista +1 21:55, 1 August 2007 (BST)

Revision as of 17:48, 16 December 2008 (view source) Zombie slay3r (talk \| contribs) m (nav) ← Older edit	Revision as of 09:10, 8 June 2010 (view source) Aichon (talk \| contribs) m (Protected "UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2007 08": Re-protected after being vandal deleted [edit=sysop:move=sysop]) Newer edit →
(No difference)

UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2007 08: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 09:10, 8 June 2010

Navigation menu

Search