UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning: Difference between revisions

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
 
(357 intermediate revisions by 26 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<div style="position: absolute; width:180px; height:75px; z-index:3; left: -220px; top: -95px; visibility: visible">[[Template:A/VBsub]]</div><div id="shortcut" class="noprint" style="border: 1px solid #999; background: #FFF; margin: 0 0 .5em 1em; text-align: center; padding: 5px; float:right; clear:right; font-size:smaller;">
{{VBheader}}
<span class="plainlinks">[[UDWiki:Shortcut|Shortcut]]</span>:<br />[[A/VB]]</div>
{{Administrationnav}}
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="margin-bottom: .5em; float: right; padding: .5em 0 .8em 1.4em; width: 250px"
|__TOC__
|}
This page is for the reporting of vandalism within the Urban Dead wiki, as defined by [[UDWiki:Vandalism|vandalism policy]]. On this wiki, the punishment for Vandalism is temporary banning, but due to security concerns, the ability to mete out this punishment is restricted to [[System Operator]]s. As such, regular users will need to lodge a report for a Vandal to be banned from the wiki. For consistency and accountability, System Operators are requested to note on this board their actions in dealing with Vandals.
 
=Guidelines for Vandalism Reporting=
In dealing with Vandalism, time is often of the essence. As such, we ask that all users include the following information in a Vandalism report:
 
* '''A link to the pages in question.'''
:Preferably bolded for visibility. If the Vandalism is occurring over a sufficiently large number of pages, instead include a time range of the vandalism attempt, or alternatively, a link to the first vandalised page. This allows us to quickly find the damage so we can quickly assess the situation.
 
* '''The user name of the Vandal.'''
:This allows us to more easily identify the culprit, and to check details.
 
* '''A signed datestamp.'''
:For accountability purposes, we ask that you record in your request your user name and the time you lodged the report.
 
* '''Please report at the top.'''
:There's conflict with where to post and a lot of the reports are missed. If it's placed at the top of the page it's probably going to be seen and dealt with.
 
If you see Vandalism in progress, don't wait for System Operators to deal with it, as there may be no System Operator online at the time. Lodge the report, then start reverting pages back to their original form. This can be done by going to the "History" tab at the top of the page, and finding the last edit before the Vandal's attack. When a System Operator is available, they'll assess the situation, and if the report is legitimate, we will take steps to either warn the vandal, or ban them if they are on their second warning.
 
''If the page is long, you can add new reports by editing the top report and placing your new report above its header in the edit screen.''
 
=Before Submitting a Report=
*This page, Vandal Banning, deals with bad-faith breaches of [[:Category:Policy Documents|official policy]].
*Interpersonal complaints are better sorted out at [[UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration]].
*As much as is practical, [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith|assume good faith]] and try to iron out problems with other users one to one, only using this page as a last resort. 
*Avoid submitting reports which are petty.


=Vandalism Report Space=
=Vandalism Report Space=
{{VBtriplebox}}


{| align=center width="auto" cellspacing="0"
==October 2024==
|- align="left" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
===[[User:Axe Hack]]===
| width="500" valign="top"|
{{v|Axe Hack}}
{| style="border:solid 2px #D7D7FF; background:#F0F0FF; margin:0 auto; width:600px; font-size:85%; text-align:center; margin-bottom:12px; -moz-border-radius:12px"
|- style="border:solid 2px #CDCDEB; background:#DCDCEB; -moz-border-radius:6px"
| '''Administration Notice'''
|-
| style="padding:3px 9px" | Talk with the user before reporting or accusing someone of vandalism for small edits.  In most cases it's simply a case of a new user that doesn't know how this wiki works.  Sometimes assuming good faith and speaking with others can avoid a lot of drama, and can even help newbies feel part of this community.
|}
{| style="border:solid 2px #FFD7D7; background:#FFF0F0; margin:0 auto; width:600px; font-size:85%; text-align:center; margin-bottom:12px; -moz-border-radius:12px"
|- style="border:solid 2px #EBCDCD; background:#EBDCDC; -moz-border-radius:6px"
| '''Administration Notice'''
|-
| style="padding:3px 9px" | If you are not a System Operator, the user who made the vandal report, the user being reported, or directly involved in the case, the administration asks that you use the [[UDWiki_talk:Administration/Vandal_Banning|talk page]] for further discussion. Free-for-all commenting can lead to a less respectful environment.
|}
{| style="border:solid 2px #D7FFD7; background:#F0FFF0; margin:0 auto; width:600px; font-size:85%; text-align:center; margin-bottom:12px; -moz-border-radius:12px"
|- style="border:solid 2px #CDEBCD; background:#DCEBDC; -moz-border-radius:6px"
| '''Administration Notice'''
|-
| style="padding:3px 9px" | Warned users can remove one entry of their [[A/VD|warning history]] every one month and 250 edits after their last warning. To lodge a request for de-escalation, please visit [[A/DE]]. You are as responsible for keeping track of your history as the sysops are; In case of a sysop wrongly punishing you due to an outdated history, they might not be punished for their actions.
|}
|}
 
<br style="clear: left" />
 
==July==
===[[User:Rememberwhenpeopleplayedthis]]===
{{v|Rememberwhenpeopleplayedthis}}
He's been deleting user comments from my talk page, restoring comments I removed from my talk page, and undoing my edits on [[ENVY]], which is a group page that I own. Take a look at what this guy is doing on [[ENVY]] and my talk page". --[[User:Murderess|Murderess]] ([[User talk:Murderess|talk]]) 21:42, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
:'''Vandalism''' - Murderess contacted me via Discord to ask about this case and what to say, so she already hit the high points about why these are fairly open-and-shut cases (note my use of the plural). We give people some leeway to delete comments on their own talk pages, but deleting a page owner's comments on their own talk page is nearly always vandalism, and certainly is in this case. And Remember made it abundantly clear it wasn't an accident when they continued deleting/restoring content on the talk page, contrary to the specific efforts of that page's owner. Likewise, using the Undo button to undo edits made by a group's owner on their own group page is not something I can think of any valid excuse for, and given that it comes just a week after the activity on the talk page, it clearly wasn't a mere coincidence.
:Though this was reported as a single case of vandalism, I'm actually inclined to treat these as separate incidents of vandalism and thus issue '''two warnings''', because the actions were on two separate pages and were over a week apart from each other. Thoughts from other 'sops? {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 22:17, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
::Definitely '''vandalism''', although I'd say just one warning since there was only one message (that I can find, from JISOR) asking Remember to stop, and even that wasn't that clear that it was vandalism that was the concern. Any future edits like it and I'm down to warn again. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 22:58, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
::I’m not a sysop and I know I do this a lot but I want to quickly signal that I don’t recall any precedent that two warnings has been done before (at least in a circumstance like this). Surely the fact no one reported Remember for the first edit would have been to him/her an implicit, though incorrect, indication that these kind of edits aren’t vandalism, hence enabling them to think that doing this a second time is ok. Wouldnt two warnings be a bit draconian? {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 01:38, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
:::Yeah, I agree with the '''one''' warning. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 01:48, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
::::I will add this to the discussion : I asked him directly on my talk page to "stop messing with my page", which he pursued to edit out again. That was after a few back and forth. I didn't post that night, which was last week, because after reviewing the guidelines for half an hour I was ever so confused about where, what and how to post. I just dropped it hoping he would get bored and move on. Unfortunately, he has not and its why I made the effort today to seek guidance to post after he edited my group page. He afterwards claimed, in an effort to hide the griefing, that he was doing me a favor by taking out a double post but the reality is that I already had done so and that is exactly what he edited out. For any sysop that can "see" what happened, its quite clear the aim wasn't to be helpful but rather pursuing to annoy me further. --[[User:Murderess|Murderess]] ([[User talk:Murderess|talk]]) 02:57, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
:::::I too agree with just the one warning, Remember was likely just attemping to update the ENVY group page to represent their anti-survivor activities. I'm sure he won't do it again. [[User:Sniper4625|Sniper4625]] [[Image:Globetrotters_Icon.png|14px|The Malton Globetrotters]]#4625 - {{Goonsig|Sniper4625}} <sup>[[The Malton Globetrotters|<span style="color: Red">TMG</span>]]</sup> 03:10, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
::I agree with '''vandalism''', since it was on someone else's talk page and that's a no go, but I think both edits could be counted under the one warning as they have essentially been reported at the same time, versus on two separate occasions.  {{User:Stelar/sig}} 04:17, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
:: The account is just acting sock puppet for The Dead, clearly carrying on tradition. I agree with one warning for the same reasons as Stelar - although I told him twice on separate occasions, not to edit without consent or proof. -- [[User:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|∀UDIO∀TTACK]] ([[User talk:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|talk]]) 06:10, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
::: Says the Sister Mary/Audioattack sockpuppet... [[User:Rememberwhenpeopleplayedthis|Rememberwhenpeopleplayedthis]] ([[User talk:Rememberwhenpeopleplayedthis|talk]]) 16:50, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
:::I’ve unbolded your ‘one warning’ phrase. Bolded phrases like that are rulings by sysops. Regular users can’t ‘rule’. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 06:47, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
:::: Thank you for correcting and clarifying! -- [[User:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|∀UDIO∀TTACK]] ([[User talk:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|talk]]) 09:12, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
 
==June==
===[[user:Audioattack]]===
As requested - Please perm-ban and protect the following.
[[User:Audioattack]], [[user:217]], [[user:Sister Mary]], [[User:LlIIllIllIIIIllIIllIllIIIIllIl]]
They are all mine, and I would prefer if they were wiped clean before protecting them if possible. -- [[User:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection]] ([[User talk:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|talk]]) 21:00, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
:I've perma'd the accounts, deleted the talk pages, and protected the (now-nonexistent) user and talk pages. Sorry for the delay! {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 15:11, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
 
===[[User:Dragonshardz]] (3)===
{{v|Dragonshardz|Not Vandalism|Soft Warning}}


Edited my userpage [[User:Jack%27s_Inflamed_Sense_Of_Rejection]] without permission. From what was learned below, this would feel as the correct way to go about this. I will not engage further as I reverted the edited part, but I still believe it was done in negative faith which is why Im posting here. -- [[User:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection]] ([[User talk:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|talk]]) 21:36, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Submitted a [[UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning#User:Axe Hack|fake vandalism report]]. Unbelievable. Disappears for 4 years and he's already causing trouble. --[[User:Axe Hack|<span style="width: 50%; border: 1px solid red; background-color: #000000; text-align: justify; box-shadow: 2px 2px 5px silver; padding: 2px 5px 2px 5px; color: white; font-size:smaller;">•▬ ▬••▬ •</span>]] [[User talk:Axe Hack|<span style="width: 50%; border: 1px solid red; background-color: #000000; text-align: justify; box-shadow: 2px 2px 5px silver; padding: 2px 5px 2px 5px; color: white; font-size:smaller;">•••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬</span>]] <sup><sup><sup><sup><sup><i>#nerftemplatedsigs</i></sup></sup></sup></sup></sup> 08:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
:Pal, all I did was fix your redlinks so they went to the relevant suburbs instead of a page that doesn't exist. Unfucking someone's formatting is by definition an edit in good faith. Chill out. --{{User:Dragonshardz/sig}} 21:58, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
:Don't see how I can rule vandalism on this considering that the alleged edit hadn't occurred prior to its reporting. Basically, there's no edit. Therefore, '''not vandalisim'''. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 02:10, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
:I also note that on wikis, it's [[UDWiki:Vandalism|generally considered polite]] to leave a message on someone's talk page about an edit which you don't like and determine if the edit was actually made in bad faith before you go screaming to the sysops. The edit I made was pretty clearly not made in bad faith, so you're doing the same thing that "fact checker" did last month - make a spurious vandalism case based on a single edit you didn't like. --[[User_talk:Dragonshardz|dragonshardz]] | [[File:Dead-killdozer.gif|14px|The Dead]] | {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 22:22, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
::The response time on this wiki just isn't what it used to be. :( --[[User:Axe Hack|<span style="width: 50%; border: 1px solid red; background-color: #000000; text-align: justify; box-shadow: 2px 2px 5px silver; padding: 2px 5px 2px 5px; color: white; font-size:smaller;">•▬ ▬••▬ •</span>]] [[User talk:Axe Hack|<span style="width: 50%; border: 1px solid red; background-color: #000000; text-align: justify; box-shadow: 2px 2px 5px silver; padding: 2px 5px 2px 5px; color: white; font-size:smaller;">•••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬</span>]] <sup><sup><sup><sup><sup><i>#nerftemplatedsigs</i></sup></sup></sup></sup></sup> 02:55, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
:: No amount of good faith makes it okay to edit my userpage - my first warning was based on editing another userpage in good faith. On another note, I have a hard time trusting that anything you do towards me is in good faith - im quite sure you only meant to provoke - which is why im posting in the first place. -- [[User:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection]] ([[User talk:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|talk]]) 05:30, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
:::That's because edits must first be translated into Gaelic by some guy who only works from 2-4pm on a Tuesday, then sent out via carrier pigeon one letter at a time. (One [[Wikipedia:Letter (alphabet)|letter]], not [[Wikipedia:Letter (message)|letter]].) --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 04:11, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
::: A note here: The redlinks was work in progress, as you can see now. Having me revert my own work could never be considered good faith - You have no idea what im doing, which makes you unqualified to edit anything I work on. You also edited a grouppage of a person I made a gesture towards, lets not hope the [[Rolt Heights Caliphate]] takes this as vandalizing too. -- [[User:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection]] ([[User talk:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|talk]]) 05:36, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
::::Actually, the wiki's policies address this point specifically:
::::{{IndentQuote|text=We make the following notes on what ''isn't'' vandalism:<br />*An unwanted edit to any page.<br />*An edit that adds information arising from a misunderstanding.<br />*An edit that improves the page from a user you don't like.<br /><br />When we claim that a group has "ownership" of a page, this does not automatically mean that any edit made that they don't like is considered vandalism.|author=[[UDWiki:Vandalism]]}}
::::Which is to say, no, someone else actually ''can'' edit your page in good faith (though we generally frown upon it). Mind you, that doesn't necessarily mean that Dragonshardz was doing so, but the fact that they edited your talk page is not ''de facto'' evidence that they made edits in bad faith, which is what you seem to be claiming. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 17:15, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
:I would also like to request the 2 warnings received on previous accounts [[User:Sister Mary]] and [[user:Audioattack]] to be added to this account as this will be my main -- [[User:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection]] ([[User talk:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|talk]]) 21:41, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
::Shouldn't that request go to [[A/DE]] instead of here? --[[User_talk:Dragonshardz|dragonshardz]] | [[File:Dead-killdozer.gif|14px|The Dead]] | {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 22:46, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
::: The request was made here to prevent endless beuracracy, and having to look different places. The other cases are very near this one so my request was made solelely to easen up the work to be done by a sysop. If this is a problem, i will make a case to get my warnings + vandal template added. -- [[User:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection]] ([[User talk:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|talk]]) 05:30, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
::::This new account has now been added to Audioattack's Vandal Data. (Vandal Data is listed by the original account.) Also, you've only received one warning, not two. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 12:57, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
::::: The first was perhaps just a verbal warning to prevent me from breaking rules - im not quite sure - So if anyone feels like it should be looked into I believe Stelar made it based on a userpage I was trying to edit for Vyol -- [[User:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection]] ([[User talk:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|talk]]) 13:56, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
::::::I didn't turn up any form of official warning for you. Though she is a sysop, Steler may have simply been giving you a friendly suggestion/piece of advice as a fellow user. When we issue formal warnings, they're always on your talk page and always related back to cases here on A/VB. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 17:15, 6 June 2018 (UTC)


At the worst, it may be more difficult than you’d expect to argue good faith when the edit was somewhere you’re not supposed to be, something you’re not expected to do, with someone you’re not believed to get along with... {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 23:07, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
== April 2024==
:Something something talk page, not a sysop, not involved. Shoo. --[[User_talk:Dragonshardz|dragonshardz]] | [[File:Dead-killdozer.gif|14px|The Dead]] | {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 23:35, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
===[[User:Tesy]]===
::There’s some irony there, considering the nature of this case. I enjoy it. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 00:42, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
{{v|Tesy|Vandal alt|Banned}}
:::You mean the totally spurious nature? I'm glad you agree. --[[User_talk:Dragonshardz|dragonshardz]] | [[File:Dead-killdozer.gif|14px|The Dead]] | {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 00:54, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
::: Hilarious actually -- [[User:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection]] ([[User talk:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|talk]]) 05:30, 6 June 2018 (UTC)


Based on the below, Dragonshardz's edit was clearly done with the knowledge that it was poking a bear with a not-very-long stick. Whether the content of the edit was good faith or not, the context of it seems not to have been. This is in contrast to [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User%3AJack%27s_Inflamed_Sense_Of_Rejection&diff=2354055&oldid=2353990 the edit I made to JISOR's page], which was necessary because the page was being miscategorized, and therefore affecting another important part of the wiki (the categorization system). The redlinks on JISOR's page weren't affecting any other part of the wiki. If the redlink was so bothersome, Dragonshardz could have created the page at [[DONE]] (which JISOR eventually did).
The March vandal is back with a new alt, and continuing what they started last month. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">▋</span>]]</span>''' 16:41, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
:I did the thing. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 00:46, 6 April 2024 (UTC)


Thus I'm voting '''soft warning''' specifically mentioning that it's a good idea for Dragonshardz to leave any userpage of JISOR/Audioattack's alone. Waiting on other sops to comment tho. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 13:05, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
==March 2024==
:I'll agree with a '''Not Vandalism''' and a '''Soft Warning''' that poking bears is bad practice and that, when in doubt with user pages, it's good practice to simply point out mistakes on talk pages instead.
===[[User:EpicWikiGuy]]===
:It seems pretty clear that Dragonshardz' motivations were not entirely benevolent in making that edit (i.e. they were definitely trying to stick it to JISOR). Even so, I ''do'' think that Dragonshardz honestly believed—and had good reason to believe—that their edit would be in accordance with JISOR's intent and purpose for the page. It's exceptionally unusual for someone to demonstrate a clear pattern in their userspace code and then intentionally break from that pattern in order to link to a non-existent page outside of their userspace, so restoring the pattern would seem like the right thing to do. Likewise, JISOR's edits routinely contain errors—presumably because they don't preview their edits before saving—so anyone who has interacted with JISOR would have good reason to think that those redlinks were saved by accident.
{{v|EpicWikiGuy|Vandal alt|Banned}}
:Honestly, this is exactly the sort of "helpful" edit that I could have seen any veteran wiki editor making in good faith, had they found the seeming-mistakes first, so while I don't think Dragonshardz was being altruistic, I don't think they trying to do anything other than improve the wiki. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 17:15, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Vandalized the SoC's page on his third edit as a user by [https://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Template:SoCnavbar&diff=2428778&oldid=2427320 replacing URLs with NSFW links]. Many of his edits since then appear to be [https://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Lascelles_Library&diff=prev&oldid=2428799 boring] [https://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Soldiers_of_Crossman&diff=next&oldid=2428820 varieties] [https://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=The_Pimm_Building&diff=prev&oldid=2428793 of] [https://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Dustan_Towers&diff=prev&oldid=2428800 defacement], including owned pages (and he also took a moment to create a group impersonation page), so it's clear he isn't acting in good faith. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 19:52, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
:: I can't find myself to agree on what you are stating here. It was VERY clear that i deleted the suburb templates and was about to make another one - there were no seeming-mistakes as far as im concerned as the suburb templates removed had to be ctrl-f searched to be located. I will recognize your ruling, but I can never accept that you think that another user is qualified to revert my userpage based on "what they think" should be there. If he had bothered looking at the edit, he would have noticed that it wasn't random formatting error, but precisely the burbs I edited prior to adding the map to the profile. I can't consider pushing other peoples thoughts onto my userpage as good faith, or even a contribution if I have to revert the work done. Like Bob wrote, the correct way to do it would be to add the page I was redirecting to, and not reverting what i purposely did. I would think this logic makes it way to easy for everyone to edit each other userpages based on what we think they are going to be, even live-editing while im away from the computer. That would make it crazy interesting to edit some stuff if this is allowed? -- [[User:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection]] ([[User talk:Jack&#39;s Inflamed Sense Of Rejection|talk]]) 18:02, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
:Banned. Can't seem to rollback [[User:DangerReport/The Harraway Building]] but I'll circle back on that later. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 01:32, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
:::Technically userpages (unless specifically protected) ''are'' editable by anybody. In general, the correct response to someone unwanted editing your page is just to revert the edits, maybe leave a message on their talk page explaining that you don't want your page edited by others (or put a header on your userpage saying as much), and only bring it to A/VB if it's persistent and repetitive such that reverting the edits becomes seriously burdensome. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 22:02, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
::[https://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User%3ADangerReport%2FThe_Harraway_Building&type=revision&diff=2428810&oldid=2428760 They have undone their own edit on the Harraway Building], so there is nothing to rollback. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">▋</span>]]</span>''' 12:45, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
::::Firstly, the text I changed did not need to be searched out with a CTRL+F. Unless you're editing on a phone, it's not that hard to scroll down and add the appropriate suburb name piped next to "DONE". That single edit was made with the assumption that audioattack/JISoR was using the danger map code as a checklist of sorts and that they were (clumsily) replacing the suburb names with "DONE" instead of appending a piped "DONE" in the link - that is, changing <nowiki>[[Shearbank]]</nowiki> to <nowiki>[[Shearbank|DONE]]</nowiki>. Both Bob and Aichon are correct that the less dramatic move would be to revert the edits and [[User_talk:Dragonshardz|drop me a line]] explaining the intent behind linking to [[DONE]] instead of the suburb pages. I certainly wasn't editing with the intent to create drama, but then again I probably should have foresaw the fact that JISoR is a drama quean and would go screaming to A/VB the moment anyone dared to touch their wiki pages - even after they left not even 48 hours ago in a two-door huff. --[[User_talk:Dragonshardz|dragonshardz]] | [[File:Dead-killdozer.gif|14px|The Dead]] | {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 22:47, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
:::Huh. I guess that makes sense. Never tried to rollback multiple edits where the net difference is zero before. Wiki can't handle an edit with no changes made, so it just errors. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 15:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC)


===[[User:Sister Mary]]===
===[[User:A helpful little gn0me]]===
{{v|Sister Mary|Vandalism|Warning}}
{{v|A helpful little gn0me|Vandal alt|Banned}}


Blanked [[User talk:Sniper4625]] - normally I would give benefit of the doubt, but they seem quite hostile, so I thought I would bring it to your attention. Regards~ [[User:Sniper4625|Sniper4625]] ([[User talk:Sniper4625|talk]]) 23:32, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Obvious ban evasion alt of [[#User:Scrotum|the one below]]. The bad impersonation of AHLG is just the cherry on top. I recommend to check-user and issue an IP ban, also check if there is VPN abuse involved. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">▋</span>]]</span>''' 13:11, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
: I won't need any benefit of doubt, thanks for considering my feelings though. After reading I wanted to have my talk page protected both Sniper and Dragontard came to write on my page - if you don't want any hostile behavior I suggest you fuck off and leave me alone :) I don't even know who the fuck you guys are. {{unsigned|Sister Mary|23:37 June 3 2018}}
:Got him. We have all mysteriously lost checkuser privileges ("no such special page"). So gotta use your imagination a bit. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 15:06, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
::<small>''further discussion moved to the [[UDWiki_talk:Administration/Vandal_Banning#User:Sister_Mary|talk page]]''</small>


Would everyone other than the involved parties (i.e. all of you besides Sniper and Sister Mary) please stop spamming admin pages? Hash out your differences somewhere other than here. We'll ask people for more information if we need it. And for those of you who ''are'' involved parties, keep your comments on topic or take them elsewhere. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 02:23, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
===[[User:Scrotum]]===
: You can delete all of this Aichon. Im out :) {{unsigned|Sister Mary|02:31, 4 June 2018}}
{{v|Scrotum|3EV|Permabanned}}
::As he uh apparently has just re-regged as 217, I guess that's that. Does the warning (I assume,) carry over? [[User:Sniper4625|Sniper4625]] ([[User talk:Sniper4625|talk]]) 02:38, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
::: Bring the vandal report over, as stated I have no problem dealing with that. At this point im going to make the A/A request, because as you clearly see these people are doing their best to keep the flames going. [[User:217|217]] ([[User talk:217|talk]]) 02:41, 4 June 2018 (UTC)


'''Vandalism''' and a '''Warning'''. Don't blank other's pages. I'll serve the warning officially over at the Sister Mary page, but I assume you'll see it here as well. And yes, warnings carry over between accounts. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 02:51, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Repeatedly vandalized the pages of [[Fort Feral Zombies]] and [[FPDF]] (among others). A note on the user talk page to cease the behaviour has already been left by me, but it was ignored. Scrotum qualifies for an immediate permaban as an [[UDWiki:Administration/Guidelines#When_a_User_May_be_Warned_or_Banned|3EV]], as they have made more than three edits of which none was constructive. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">▋</span>]]</span>''' 18:10, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
: You can go ahead and add that warning to the other shit I already have at {{usr|audioattack}} as I won't login to the other accounts. Feel free to ban me as I have no idea what the next step is. [[User:217|217]] ([[User talk:217|talk]]) 03:00, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
:Pretty sure this is the same guy as https://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Special:Contributions/Thetruth, based on the similarity in edit history. Seems like clear cut vandalism. -- [[User:Dislycan|Dislycan]] ([[User talk:Dislycan|talk]]) 18:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
::We tend not to immediately ban accounts on their first offense unless we've banned the person previously and they're circumventing the ban or they clearly only created the account to stir up trouble. You didn't do either (even though you did stir up some trouble), so you get a warning. And [[UDWiki:Administration/Guidelines#Cycle_of_Warnings_and_Bannings|the steps are here]]. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 03:12, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
::Could be. Anyways, banned. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 03:19, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
::: Aichon im not getting anywhere with you, what you tell the other guys, or with them. This has become a fight between 3 people banding together, a sysop who doesnt make consequence after saying stop (they stilllllllllllllllll comment on here.) and myself. Im not going to win anything so Im going to cut my losses :) [[User:Sister Mary|Sister Mary]] ([[User talk:Sister Mary|talk]]) 03:24, 4 June 2018 (UTC)  
::::I went away for a few minutes. That doesn’t mean I’m ignoring you or anyone else. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 03:31, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
::::: My problem was not that you should be available right there - but mostly that you do very little to prevent other people from stirring up more drama. I don't really know what I expect though, you said stop and they shit on that, so you're probably gonna say stop a couple more times (I noticed you already tried one more time, but I feel this is only stopping due to me leaving the wiki..) I requested deletion of all my accounts, so im going to sign out now and find something else to play :) Best of luck, and have fun eating harmanz! [[User:Audioattack|Audioattack]] ([[User talk:Audioattack|talk]]) 03:44, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
::::::Oh, you’re mistaken about the job of sysops. [[UDWiki:Administration/Policy_Discussion/Sysops_are_not_Moderators|Sysops are not moderators]]. We don’t moderate drama. We simply deal with it. We’re janitors, not nannies. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 03:51, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
:<small>''further discussion moved to the [[UDWiki_talk:Administration/Vandal_Banning#User:Sister_Mary|talk page]]''</small>
:Just seconding the verdict here. All the drama seems to happen while I'm asleep. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 15:29, 4 June 2018 (UTC)


I also get the fact that you really want to destroy my mood, and after that get rid of me, even though I edit way more than what I see from your contributions. But you get what you want, seems like the sysops has given retards a run for their money in here. It's sad - but hey, you win! [[User:Sister Mary|Sister Mary]] ([[User talk:Sister Mary|talk]]) 03:16, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
==October 2023==
===[[User:Matahashi]]===
{{v|Matahashi|Vandalism|Warned}}
Repeatedly and consistently blanking [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Soldiers_of_Confusedmen&redirect=no Soldiers of Confusedmen] or removing content from the page [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Soldiers_of_Confusedmen&action=history despite multiple requests] to, y'know, not mess with a group page they don't own. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 21:31, 12 October 2023 (UTC)


==May==
I never once blanked the page, only corrected false information which isnt vandalism. Specifically says on vandalism page that unwanted edits are not vandalism so long as they are in good faith. {{unsigned|Matahashi|17:53, 12 October 2023‎ }}
===[[User:SignalGK]]===
:I think the real issue here is that Matahashi is clearly a FckFaceMgee alt, since they took over where FckFace left off. This is not about unwanted edits, it about point of view and semantics.  The Soldiers of Crossmen want to play with us, it is their intention to draw us into a friendly game of tug of war.  We oblige and consider them to be friends.  Whether or not they want to label us as friends or frenemies or enemies or whatever should not prevent us from expressing our point of view.[[User:ZPatriot|ZPatriot]] ([[User talk:ZPatriot|talk]])
{{v|SignalGK|Vandalism|Warning}}
::The fckfacemgee that got banned below me was just an imposter, only 2es in the name instead of 3 from the proper character. if this is not about unwanted edits than the case is closed. {{unsigned|Matahashi|23:45, 12 October 2023‎}}
::Also hadnt bothered to check the page before answering this one, Im satisfied with what it is now if that helps you sleep at night. {{unsigned|Matahashi|00:30, 13 October 2023‎}}
:::Even if you haven't blanked the page - going by character numbers, it looked like you had - you've been consistently removing/changing content on the page in a way that doesn't meet the bar of a good faith edit and attempting to assert ownership of, effectively, formatting. Continuing to edit the page after about the 5th time you were asked to stop seems like vandalism to me, thus the report. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 18:30, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
While an unwanted edit by itself doesn't equal vandalism, all vandalism is unwanted. Generally a group page is "owned" by the creator, and non-owners shouldn't be editing the page except with permission (e.g., group member) or for maintenance (e.g., updating categories); to do otherwise might be considered vandalism. I can't verify the Matahashi = FckFaceMgee claim because CheckUser doesn't seem to be working for me. Can another Sysop confirm? For the time being, please don't continue to edit the page Matahashi, as it's clearly not constructive. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 22:25, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
:Also not enabled for me anymore either. In either case I consider this standard '''vandalism'''. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 11:35, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
::So are you goobers going to process this or what? --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 05:06, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
:::Uh, I blame DDR. Consider this a '''warning'''. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 03:16, 29 March 2024 (UTC)


Created a new account to change profile IDs on a contentious page.
==May 2023==
===[[User:FckFaceMgee]]===
{{v|FckFaceMgee}}
[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Please_make_a_Free_Offline_Version_of_Urban_Dead&oldid=2425090 Blanking the page] and [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Please_make_a_Free_Offline_Version_of_Urban_Dead&oldid=2425138 again]. Obviously bad faith edits meant to vandalize the page. Also, considering the username, it seems to be a troll account.


I don't have a chance right now to check the ID's that the account has used in the change but I'd bet good money it's for obfuscation. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 06:53, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Edit: [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Please_make_a_Free_Offline_Version_of_Urban_Dead&oldid=2425141 Just did it again].
:Seems to pretty clearly be '''Vandalism'''. Given the account's prior activity, it's a '''Warning'''. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 15:46, 21 May 2018 (UTC)


===[[User:Fact checker]]===
[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Please_make_a_Free_Offline_Version_of_Urban_Dead&oldid=2425156 4th time].
{{v|Fact checker|Not Vandalism|None}}
[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User_talk:A_Helpful_Little_Gnome&diff=2352884&oldid=2352847 Basically admitted to being a vandal alt.] The name also follows the same line of thought of the others, "Fact checker," "Thetruth," "Neutral objector," etc. He seems to think it's proxy IPs that got him banned and not the rampant vandalism (or maybe not, since he's asking another user to do the edit for him). He hasn't done anything <i>wrong</i> on this account but by virtue of being a likely vandal alt I felt I should at least notify the sysops, and leave the evidence and action up to their discretion. --[[User:Envious|Ɛňvϊoцᵴ]] ([[User talk:Envious|talk]]) 20:03, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads up, and yeah, I had my eye on him already. Anyway, I checked this one's info. His story doesn't entirely add up, but sysops are called to assume good faith, so without stronger evidence I'm not going to escalate him as a vandal or ban him on the basis of those incongruities alone, much as I might suspect the same as you. '''Not Vandalism'''. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 21:40, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
::In a few ways, alts like this follow a really strange logic. If you're using alts to do anything on this wiki other than commit vandalism, then all you're doing is using alts to achieve a single account's purpose, without gaining the advantage of influence a single account can accrue over time.
::If he's not doing anything that's explicitly vandalism, these accounts should hopefully be easily ignored. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 23:29, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


Having heard nothing from the other sysops in about a week, I'll go ahead and close this one out as '''Not Vandalism'''. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 15:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Please_make_a_Free_Offline_Version_of_Urban_Dead&oldid=2425160 5th time].
:Late but endorsing this '''not vandalism'''. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 20:12, 30 May 2018 (UTC)


===That guy that loves Soros===
[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Please_make_a_Free_Offline_Version_of_Urban_Dead&oldid=2425183 6th time].
He made a load more accounts. I banned them from my phone as a way to kill time while waiting for my delayed plane to arrive. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 17:57, 14 May 2018 (UTC)


===[[User:Auralius]]===
[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Please_make_a_Free_Offline_Version_of_Urban_Dead&oldid=2425332 7th time].
{{v|Auralius|Vandalism|24 Hour Ban}}


Removed a comment of someone criticising him. [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Talk:The_Jack&curid=192763&diff=2352796&oldid=2352795]. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 07:40, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Please_make_a_Free_Offline_Version_of_Urban_Dead&oldid=2425336 8th time].


Er... Unless he was referencing Radicalwhig in the original response and accidentally did it. I thought that second comment was directly made to The Jack. Apologies if this is the case. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 07:44, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Please_make_a_Free_Offline_Version_of_Urban_Dead&oldid=2425339 9th time].


::You linked to an edit by Auralius, and I can't see Envious ever having edited that page. ???? [[User:Sniper4625|Sniper4625]] ([[User talk:Sniper4625|talk]]) 12:32, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Please_make_a_Free_Offline_Version_of_Urban_Dead&oldid=2425342 10th time].


:wtf? --[[User:Envious|Ɛňvϊoцᵴ]] ([[User talk:Envious|talk]]) 16:07, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
--[[User:Please make a Free Offline Version of Urban Dead|Please make a Free Offline Version of Urban Dead]] ([[User talk:Please make a Free Offline Version of Urban Dead|talk]]) 23:07, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
::Apologies for that Envious. I copied the formatting of the one below and forgot to change it. My bad. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 22:05, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
:Sorry this took so long. '''Permabanned''' {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 10:38, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
::I think we should permaban Envious anyway, just to be on the safe side. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 23:58, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
:::I see your logic. You can never be too safe. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 03:32, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
::::As one of two aggrieved users in question, and therefore a relevant party to this case, I am of the opinion that Auralius needs to go for the hat trick and get 100% bannage gracing his talk page so that no one can post on it.{{User:RadicalWhig/sig}}04:34, 16 May 2018 (UTC)


Given the edit in question, it seems fairly obvious this case was intended to be against Auralius, so I’ve updated it accordingly. It’s a mild form of '''Vandalism''', but it’s vandalism nonetheless. There’s nothing to suggest that this was an accidental removal, and removing a user’s comment from someone else’s talk page has long been considered vandalism. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 18:07, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
==December 2021==
:That would be a 24 hour ban if deemed vandalism. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 23:57, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
===[[User:‎Meathshield 1]]===
::About that “if”...got any thoughts? {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 03:32, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
{{v|‎Meathshield 1|Vandalism|Banned}}
:::The "if" is a yes, especially considering it's a similar type of edit he was warned for last time. So a 24 hour ban? --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 01:08, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=The_Meatshielders&curid=195079&diff=2416779&oldid=2416251 Similar MO] to the wild wild etc crazy, though used a proxy. Banned. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 14:48, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
::::Ayup. Guess I’ll do it. '''24 Hour Ban'''. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 05:50, 16 May 2018 (UTC)


I'm a bit surprised I'm not permabanned from the site anyway with all the bitchslapping I do, though I only pop on *maybe* once a month or so to update the group page and clear out the douchebag droppings on my talk page (lookin at you, aichon) - the wiki just isn't an important thing in my life (factoring somewhere between the last scab I had and the person who was three cars behind me on the drive home yesterday) unlike some (again, lookin at you aichon).. as for the jack's talk, yeah I removed some douchebag dropping directed at me intentionally and I'd do it again. it's called not taking someone else's shit, you wiki folk should look into it. so let me know how removing a trivial 'fuck you' comment from a third-party page is 'bad faith' and put your answer in the vandalism case against aichon that we'll never see because he's staff even though he doesn't seem to know how to leave someone's page the fuck alone. [[User:Auralius|Auralius]] 13:55, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
:This wiki doesn't have a civility policy, so your courtesy or lack thereof doesn't have an impact on the consequences you receive. You get to go through the regular escalation of consequences like everyone else. But by that same token, we give just as much weight to trivial insults as we do to thoughtfully-crafted paragraphs when it comes to enforcing the rules. As such, when you removed that trivial insult, you were removing someone else's contribution to the discussion, misleadingly making it seem as if they never participated in it to begin with. We give people some leeway to control the content on their own pages (hence why no one has gotten on your case about you removing comments on your talk page), but you did that on a page that wasn't your own, which isn't something that's allowed. And if you do it again, you'll find yourself receiving lengthier and lengthier bans with each subsequent act.
:As for vandalism cases against me, the only reason there isn't one is because neither you nor anyone else has made it yet. Anyone can make cases against me, even you. If you think I've done something to warrant one, make the case. Instructions to do so are at the top of this page. Alternatively, if you think I've in any way abused my authority as a sysop (i.e. inappropriately used my rank as a badge of authority to get away with stuff, used my access to extra features on the wiki to do things I shouldn't have done, etc.), feel free to make a [[A/M|Misconduct]] case against me. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 17:41, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
:Ha lame {{User:RadicalWhig/sig}}15:13, 26 May 2018 (UTC)


===[[User:Envious]]===
==October 2021==
{{v|Envious|Not Vandalism|None}}
===[[User:Kim Jung Undead]]===
Obviously a sock puppet. Claims they have been on here 10+ years, active, but only made a new account? Looks like it might be connected to accounts sniper4625,Dragonshrdz, Mistress. Its time everyone knows what OG account this person is hiding. --[[User:The Dead 2.0|The Dead 2.0]] ([[User talk:The Dead 2.0|talk]]) 19:46, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
{{v|Kim Jung Undead|Vandalism|Warned}}


Frivolous vandal report. See below. --[[User:Envious|Ɛňvϊoцᵴ]] ([[User talk:Envious|talk]]) 19:48, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Noting that KJU's IP address is shared by two other users previously searched in the checkuser log, including [[User:Dragnshardz]], who has been permabanned.  
:Nope. you're done. Also noticed you vandal edited another person's sig on here recently? I'll let them decide if they want to complain but I'm guessing Neutral objector might take issue with what you did yes? --[[User:The Dead 2.0|The Dead 2.0]] ([[User talk:The Dead 2.0|talk]]) 19:52, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
::Correcting an improperly formatted signature is [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Talk:The_Jack&diff=2352385&oldid=2352353 Not Vandalism]. Play again? Y/N --[[User:Envious|Ɛňvϊoцᵴ]] ([[User talk:Envious|talk]]) 19:57, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
::Also, how very interesting that you would try to drag [[User:Murderess|Murderess]] into this, Jack, given that she has not posted on the wiki for days. --[[User:Envious|Ɛňvϊoцᵴ]] ([[User talk:Envious|talk]]) 19:59, 13 May 2018 (UTC)


:You'd be the expert on what Neutral Objector thinks, given that its you, Jack. C'mon son. [[User:Sniper4625|Sniper4625]] ([[User talk:Sniper4625|talk]]) 19:54, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Either we ban KJU as a vandal alt, consider them a "main" and warn them for the Dragonshardz impersonation, or, if we believe and honour their claim that they're JISOR, we associate the vandalism with JISOR/Audioattack's account and go from there. Or we do something else. Happy to have a chat over what the other sysops think. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 02:04, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
:Have any of these accounts been warned or otherwise notified about using multiple accounts to vandalize / circumvent bans?  --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 00:23, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
::Well, yes, JISOR/Audioattack has in the past, but not for this specific Dragnshardz vandalism which is what I assume you mean. Here's how it is right now: Kim Jung Undead has the same IP to 3ER account Dragnshardz, whose banning did not incur any warning for the perpetrator as we didn't know who made Dragnshardz at the time. Kim Jung Undead is claiming, on undeletions, and without hard evidence, that they are also JISOR, who is on A/VD under their original account Audioattack ([[UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Data#User:Audioattack]]). JISOR has a history of making throwaway accounts excessively so if these were all the same person I wouldn't be surprised, but there's no hard proof from the IP history.
::So what we do here depends on who you think should be considered the 'main' in all this. Someone needs a warning for the original vandalism with a 3ER alt. Do we accept KJU is Audioattack without the proof and ban them all accordingly? Or do we warn KJU as the main because we don't know with certainty that they are Audioattack? That's kinda where I'm at with this. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 01:15, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
:::I wouldn't accept that KJU is JISOR/Audioattack without the IP link, so just warn KJU on using Dragnshardz for vandalism? --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 02:11, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
::::As the party affected by the attempted impersonation, warning KJU for the attempt seems just and reasonable, especially since there's no direct proof they're JISOR/Audioattack. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 07:43, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
::::[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADragonshardz&diff=2416218&oldid=2416203 This edit] seems to back up that KJU is the same person that tried to impersonate me. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 07:44, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
I found all the old edits on the JISOR account, among others - From what I understand you can only link my to myself via IP, so regardless of how you want to warn or ban or bake a cake I will just proxy a new account and go from there :) Thanks anyhow though! [[User:Kim Jung Undead|Kim Jung Undead]] ([[User talk:Kim Jung Undead|talk]]) 17:11, 8 November 2021 (UTC)


Case was created in bad faith by a vandal alt. Closing as '''Not Vandalism''' without any investigation. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 20:52, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Hey doofuses, did you forget to do anything with this report for months? C'mon. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 07:04, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
:Apologies. I must have lost interest once it was apparent this wouldn't end in some sort of big brain Harvey Specter play. I have '''warned''' Kim Jung Undead for vandalism with the prior edits as the alt Dragnshardz. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}}


===[[User:Dragonshardz]] (2)===
===[[User:Wild wild crazy]]===
{{v|Dragonshardz|Not Vandalism|None}}
{{v|Wild wild crazy|Vandalism|Warned}}
Vandalizing the new page I created. As another member I have every right to create the page and since none was created took initiative. Dragonshardz refuses to follow warnings or protocol regarding someone else's creation. Just because you are one of The Dead, like myself, does not mean you get to superceeded. Thank you for the work you did before regarding the link but that does not mean you get to own everything and vandalize property you did not create.  
[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=The_Dead&diff=2415542&oldid=2415541 Vandalized] [[The Dead]]. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 04:32, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Now please leave the page alone until further notice, and it will be opened up to editing once the official template has been added.  
:I have warned them. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 03:30, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
Again, we requested protected status for the page for just this reason. Also it is expected that no "homecooking favoritism" be shown to these other users or this will have to be taken further if administration is involved. --[[User:The Dead 2.0|The Dead 2.0]] ([[User talk:The Dead 2.0|talk]]) 19:46, 13 May 2018 (UTC)  
::This is probably them again http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Special:Contributions/Wild_Wild_Wild_Crazy. Vandalized The Globetrotters. --<sub>[[User:Kirsty_cotton|<span style="color: lightgrey">K</span>]]</sub> 16:34, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
:I'm not a member of The Dead. You're another of Jack's sockpuppets. ''Go away.'' --[[User:Dragonshardz|Dragonshardz]] ([[User talk:Dragonshardz|talk]]) 19:50, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
:::Looked like it to me. Blocked and warned the original user. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 15:11, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
:Frivolous vandal report. See below. --[[User:Envious|Ɛňvϊoцᵴ]] ([[User talk:Envious|talk]]) 19:48, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Some more vandalism to [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=The_Malton_Globetrotters&diff=prev&oldid=2415915 the Malton Globetrotters] and [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=The_Dead&diff=prev&oldid=2415916 the Dead]. I've filed this all under [[User:Wild Crazy]] as this seems to be the oldest "Wild Crazy" .--{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 18:08, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
:Frivolous report, not a member, just Jack. [[User:Sniper4625|Sniper4625]] ([[User talk:Sniper4625|talk]]) 19:51, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
:[[Special:Contributions/Wild_Wild_Wild_Wild_Crazy|You will never guess the contrib history of 4x Wild Crazy]] --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">▋</span>]]</span>''' 17:50, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
::Blocked accordingly. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 21:45, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
:::How are we not already at perma? http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Special:Contributions/Wild_Wild_Wild_Wild_Wild_Crazy --<sub>[[User:Kirsty_cotton|<span style="color: lightgrey">K</span>]]</sub> 23:40, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
::::Because there are no gods. No masters. [[User:Kim Jung Undead|Kim Jung Undead]] ([[User talk:Kim Jung Undead|talk]]) 23:44, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
::::It's getting there. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 00:22, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
See [[User:Crazy Wild]], blocked. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 00:50, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
:Several more alt accounts have been created. Technically, we need a perma ban vote with 2/3 sysops to agree to perma ban the main account, unless the main account accrues 12 months worth of bans. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 13:05, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
::Unless this was you DDR, and I need to ban you? --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 13:07, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
:::Eh, or the vandal got on a boat and sailed away... --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 13:09, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
:::: I support permaban of DDR.  --<sub>[[User:Kirsty_cotton|<span style="color: lightgrey">K</span>]]</sub> 15:23, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
:::::Lol... I probably should have explained myself there. I made the next set of expected accounts to park and idle them. Hopefully it will break the cycle of stupidity. I dunno. It's just so crazy it might work..... right? {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 21:37, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
::::::It's just this technically makes you a vandal alt creator on five counts. So, 2 warnings, 24 hour ban, a 48 hour ban, and a week = I should ban you for 10 days. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 21:58, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
:::::::My babies did no such vandalising. They were innocent when you smote them down! {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 01:32, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Not vandalism but possible ban evasion.
Wild crazy made the zerg group page. http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Special:Contributions/A_Meatshielder --<sub>[[User:Kirsty_cotton|<span style="color: lightgrey">K</span>]]</sub> 18:31, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
:It looks like the same person to me. Any other sysops want to weigh in on a perma on the main account? --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 22:16, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
::Fine by me. As close to a 3-edit vandal as can be, without 100% being one. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 01:33, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
::: This probably him again. http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Special:Contributions/Lactose. Judging by the edit to meatshielders. --<sub>[[User:Kirsty_cotton|<span style="color: lightgrey">K</span>]]</sub> 13:06, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
::::AHLG, what's your take on this? Same crap, slightly changed MO (annoying the dead by playing dumb rather than outright vandalising) and the IP addresses are very similar to the other ones from Wild Crazy yet not the same (checkuser IP logs have them if you want to look). Are you happy to lump Lactose with Wild Crazy? {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 22:38, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
:::::The IPs have all switched around slightly between each alt. I've been banning them based on the similar behaviour, the similarities in the IPs and the fact that they all come from location "X". I would ban Lactose and move up to a third month ban on Wild Crazy (currently just on a 1 month). --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 00:30, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
::::::Do it. That triggers a perma vote anyway. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 01:17, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
:::::::Done! --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 02:18, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Wow. Just....wow. If I had a nickel for every time someone got this insanely butthurt, I'd have two nickels. Which isn't a lot, but it's weird that it happened twice. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 20:04, 5 November 2021 (UTC)


:Interesting how these three accounts are all interconnected so often and at the same times. Almost as if it was the same person stupidly thinking that using multiple accounts means you get multiple votes. looks like its time for the sysops to dig into this further. Also, you guys either ARE Jack or you just like to try and blanket blame him/them for everything you secretly do. i'm wondering how much breaking the rules. Time for that to change it seems. This isn't going away. The whole little wink, wink, nudge, nudge you've had going to coming out too. If it has to keep going to the top, even emailing to Kevan himself if needed be, then so be it. I'm serious to see how it all turns out given how much can be proven on here at this point. Fascinating. --[[User:The Dead 2.0|The Dead 2.0]] ([[User talk:The Dead 2.0|talk]]) 19:57, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
[[User:A Small Doughnut|Add this one]]. Main account escalated. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 00:49, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
::You got us, Jack! Sometimes we're so interconnected that we even type our posts simultaneously and our edits conflict. It's all thanks to my freakish set of six functional arms that it's possible for me to write on three keyboards at once. Also please note mentioning contacting Kevan, which has been a central focus of The Jack's radio broadcasts in the past few days. --[[User:Envious|Ɛňvϊoцᵴ]] ([[User talk:Envious|talk]]) 20:07, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
::[[File:JackBroadcast.png|700px]]
::You're still terrible at using colons to indent your stuff properly. Please learn to edit the wiki. --[[User:Dragonshardz|Dragonshardz]] ([[User talk:Dragonshardz|talk]]) 20:03, 13 May 2018 (UTC)


I’m not even going to bother reading this, given that it was brought by a vandal alt that has since been banned and can actually be deleted as a vandal edit. '''Not Vandalism'''. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 20:45, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
===[[User:Clayton Carmine]]===
{{v|Clayton Carmine|Not Vandalism|None}}


===[[User:The Dead 2.0]]===
Continues to make unsubstantiated edits to [[User:DangerReport/Darvall Heights]]
{{v|The Dead 2.0|Vandal alt|Perma’d}}
<br>If you look at the history, he even did a same day revert of Bob's changes
{{v|Neutral objector|Vandal alt|Perma’d}}
<br>http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User%3ADangerReport%2FDarvall_Heights&diff=2406996&oldid=2406921
(^The likely owner of the account.)
<br>Clearly he is just being a sore loser and making bad faith edits as a poor attempt to troll.
<br>I mean at least wait a day or two for the situation on the ground to actually change before just auto stomping reasonable intel updates. {{unsigned|ZPatriot|21:53, 12 October 2021}}
:I'm not yet demoted but going to refrain from ruling. That said, I wanted to drop in and reiterate [[UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning/Archive/2018#User:Dragonshardz|what I've said before]], which is that "the suburb danger statuses are the part of the wiki most designed to be corrected/adjusted with extreme frequency by interested users. In addition, the boundaries of what constitutes what status are vague and arguable on purpose. I doubt I'd ever accept an A/VB case based on a danger status dispute, unless it's a user clearly lying and manipulating the status in order to e.g. lure players or alter their behavior." {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 22:57, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
::That is literally what's happening.  Its in Clayton's interest to have the suburb look like an active combat zone to attract people there.  They are not making changes based on an actual evaluation of the status on the ground, it's a knee jerk reaction to my modification.  They are simply using the wiki as a combative tool, showing their preferred status.  The situation on the ground in Darvall is no different then any of the other ghost suburbs. These edits are in bad faith, 100% [[User:ZPatriot|ZPatriot]] ([[User talk:ZPatriot|talk]]) 06:38, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
:::Isn't what is happening at all so please don't put words in my mouth. Apologies for not taking your word on the state of Darvall Heights when all you had to add was "appears abandoned" as your reasonable intel update, yet we have survivors in the area and zombies sleeping in ruins around the suburb. Since this is such a sticky subject for you I'll give it a day before updating changes made to Darvall Heights Danger Report, even though the situation on the ground could change in a shorter span of time. [[User:Clayton Carmine|Clayton Carmine]] ([[User talk:Clayton Carmine|talk]]) 00:03, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
::::All I ask is that you take the time to evaluate the situation before making the change.  There had been little to no activity in the area for a couple days and I did a scout around and everything was still trashed, no humans to be found, and most of our people had gotten board and wandered outward.  I literally said "The Heights appear abandoned for the moment." in my summary.  Since you didn't bother to put any comments on your changes, all we are left with is projection, so not sure how you can expect anything other then that to occur. [[User:ZPatriot|ZPatriot]] ([[User talk:ZPatriot|talk]]) 09:43, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
This is a better fit for [[A/A]]. As I can't verify what's actually happening in this suburb, I can't say if anyone is fabricating the danger level. I'd recommend providing evidence when updating the level, or relying on the external military reports as they are more neutral. Otherwise, the edit warring will go nowhere. '''NV'''. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 01:51, 14 October 2021 (UTC)


Recently created impersonation account. It's clear from the mood of the discussions over at [[A/P]] that it was created solely to try and pretend to be The Dead -- for one, they've asked for their original group page back <b>so that they don't have to go by The Dead 2.0 anymore</b>. Secondly the account is asking to protect a page that was just freed up for editing so that only they can edit it. A speedy perma would be prudent. --[[User:Envious|Ɛňvϊoцᵴ]] ([[User talk:Envious|talk]]) 18:49, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
'''Not Vandalism''' - But it's closer to vandalism than it should be. Normally we don't rule on this kind of stuff at all because it's not the sysop's job to rule on grey areas created by interpreting the danger zones, but having quickly scouted Darvall, I would say there's essentially nothing that should classify it as Very Dangerous, let alone fighting someone in an edit war to keep it that way. That is unless the suburb went from "zombie-infested and/or massive hostile zombie mobs" to "devoid of significant survivor or zombie populations" in the two days between the edit dispute and my inspection. It's possible I guess. I'm also concerned by Clayton's reverting of Bob's report that was ''sourced by the EMRP'' and should be the most neutral and technically correct status at the time.
:The user in question is repeatedly reverting edits made on behalf of a member of [[The Dead]] and removing constructive, useful information. --[[User:Dragonshardz|Dragonshardz]] ([[User talk:Dragonshardz|talk]]) 19:33, 13 May 2018 (UTC)


:Nice try. Not an impersonation and I created the page. Envious is OBVIOSULY a fake account since they claim to be a member for 10+ years but its a new account. Dragonshardz has been warned before for vandalism. As a memeber of the group I have every right to create the page and did so. If they had created it then I would be the one vandalizing but since I created it
TLDR; It's not fair to assume every one of Clayton's reverts in the past were based on a bad faith interpretations of Extremely Dangerous, especially since not all of them were to change the status to Extremely Dangerous anyway. I think that kind of history would be required to call this behaviour vandalism. But it definitely felt closer to bad-faith than the typical dispute. I think if the status isn't clear cut, your idea of waiting a little longer before changing it may be good Clayton. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 06:24, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
:Dragonshardz is vandalizing.
:I am trying to be considerate here, but the true abuse is clear.
:Envious is a fake account/sock puppet.
:Dragonshardz is vandalizing a account they did not create.
:Please file the appropriate charges against them (since they are likely the same account too given how often they operate together, please look into that too). --[[User:The Dead 2.0|The Dead 2.0]] ([[User talk:The Dead 2.0|talk]]) 19:38, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
::Envious is a fake account/sockpuppet! --account that was created today to edit war over a single page and who conveniently [https://i.imgur.com/gPfoMry.png uses the exact same] [https://i.imgur.com/9RmcrKM.png post formatting as] [[User:Neutral objector|Neutral objector]]. Hmmmmm. Please post your The Dead profile, if you are a member of the group. --[[User:Envious|Ɛňvϊoцᵴ]] ([[User talk:Envious|talk]]) 19:48, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
::Merely making the page doesn't mean you're actually a member of the group, and it's members of the group who should have control over the contents of the page. Also, please learn to indent your commentary properly, thanks in advance. Also I haven't ever been warned for vandalism in the past, champ, keep trying. Oh and pages are not the same as accounts, so you're 0 for 3. --[[User:Dragonshardz|Dragonshardz]] ([[User talk:Dragonshardz|talk]]) 19:46, 13 May 2018 (UTC)


:In case it's not blatantly obvious, dude isn't one of us. Mods do the needful thanks. [[User:Sniper4625|Sniper4625]] ([[User talk:Sniper4625|talk]]) 19:41, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
==March 2021==
===[[User:Fistbump Jackson]]===
{{v|Fistbump Jackson|Not Vandalism|None}}


Every single edit from Neutral objector has been via a proxy. I’ve '''blocked the proxy permanently and banned the account as a vandal alt''', given that literally every single action it’s ever undertaken—including creating the account itself—was an act of vandalism, and the account made no other redeeming edits to suggest that its intent was anything other than to wade into drama in an effort to create a false consensus. I still need to look into the other account...{{User:Aichon/Signature}} 20:29, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Well I guess we're seeing how this plays out. [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Fistbump_Jackson&curid=194759&diff=2412307&oldid=2412140 Has redirected his talk page to a category page] despite the notice provided after the discussion below. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 12:36, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
:Different proxies, but same story for The Dead 2.0. '''Perma’d''' the same as the other. We don’t ''know'' that they were the same person, but you can draw your own conclusions... {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 20:41, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
:Well if you want to pull the trigger, go ahead, but I won't look. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 17:49, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
:I was warned against redirecting to groups and users. Not categories. Check the history. Furthermore, I asked to be pointed to a specific rule or any kind of precedent and received none. [[User:Fistbump Jackson|Fistbump Jackson]] ([[User talk:Fistbump Jackson|talk]]) 20:54, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
:If the rule and/or precedent is “hi I’m DDR/Bob Moncrief and I rule by fiat” then cool but I’d like you to at least say that. [[User:Fistbump Jackson|Fistbump Jackson]] ([[User talk:Fistbump Jackson|talk]])|
::Based on the below case, most active sysops made clear their position was that any redirect of a user talk page produces an unreasonable barrier to contacting that user. <s>'''Vandalism.'''</s> ''revised, see below'' {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 13:16, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
:::well good job linking me to the discussion! i didn’t know this page, or that discussion, even existed until yesterday [[User:Fistbump Jackson|Fistbump Jackson]] ([[User talk:Fistbump Jackson|talk]]) 13:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
::::Are you planning to redirect your talk page again? {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 14:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
::::It seems based on subsequent edits like FJ is planning not to do so again. I'm happy to revise to '''not vandalism''' with '''soft warning''' already served. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 13:59, 12 April 2021 (UTC)


===[[User:Babaoreily]]===
Easy. Concluded as '''Not Vandalism'''. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 02:50, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
{{v|Babaoreily|Not Vandalism|None}}
Account created today to edit war over the Danger Report pages. 3EV? --[[User:Envious|Envious]] ([[User talk:Envious|talk]]) 16:41, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
:Pending information from an uninvolved, trustworthy third-party, I'll delay a full ruling on whether or not the edits themselves are vandalism. That said, the only IP addresses they've used so far were proxy addresses, so I've gone ahead and immediately blocked all of them. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 17:47, 8 May 2018 (UTC)


Nothing heard from them since, so I suppose the matter is resolved one way or another. Thanks! --[[User:Envious|Envious]] ([[User talk:Envious|talk]]) 01:29, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
===[[User:Dragnshardz]]===
{{v|Dragnshardz|3eV Impersonation|Perma}}


I’m going to call it '''Not Vandalism''' and close it out. The situation resolved itself. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 20:07, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Based on IP data & edits, a clear attempt at impersonating [[User:Dragonshardz]]. I've blocked the user based on IP data which indicates they are absolutely not the same user, about to revert the edits (which are all userspace & talk page messages, hence the 3eV), but would love a sysop to double-check me before I block the IP and delete the user/talk/sig pages. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 17:07, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
:Sounds good to me. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 22:10, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
:Yep, all good. Deleted. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 23:12, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
:As the party they were trying to affect: lmao, owned, idiot. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 23:57, 28 March 2021 (UTC)


===[[User:Dragonshardz]]===
===[[User:Dragonshardz]]===
{{v|Dragonshardz|Not Vandalism|None}}
{{v|Dragonshardz|Not Vandalism|None}}
Hello, it would seem this user made recent changes to the danger levels for the areas Peddlesden Village, Chudleyton ,West Becktown, Owsleybank, Molebank, but having run through them myself to check and none are even close to red. Wouldn't really even consider them yellow as Darvall Heights looks worse by comparison to them. More accurate would probably be the Intact code. I didn't want to make edits myself to cause flare ups like recent issues on here. And while I don't think this person intended Vandalism, fictionally modifying areas to fit your group narrative (The Dead), is still a vandalism of a sort because it is neither neutral nor accurate. Can a request for an sysop that actively plays verify this before making the change? {{unsigned|Fact checker|02:11, 8 May 2018 (UTC)}}
:Deliberately posting false information is considered bad faith and is, as a result, an act of vandalism. That said, if The Dead is active in large numbers in that region, very dangerous may be applicable, even if the infrastructure is still intact, which is one possible consideration. Anyway, I’ll leave the checking to the ‘sops who play. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 02:38, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
:It's entirely possible if the numbers on the stats page is true (it says 122 as of writing this), and both the 'dangerous' and 'very dangerous' statuses both say "hostile mobs" so maybe that's the reason for the change and not the building statuses themselves. I will try and get an alt to that area and see if the changes are correct or need to be reverted/amended. {{User:Stelar/sig}} 14:19, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
:Hmmmm... fresh account made specifically to attack this user, says they're posting from their phone (which allows them a dynamic IP)... malicious prosecution, methinks. I mean, I think we can all guess who "Fact Checker" is, but I'd recommend sysops dismiss this for the libel it is. Having personally been to those areas, West Becktown and Molebank are 100% ruined, and the outlying areas are in a state of disarray and filled with zombies. --[[User:Envious|Envious]] ([[User talk:Envious|talk]]) 15:22, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
:It's [[UDWiki:Vandalism|generally considered polite]], in Wiki circles, to leave a message on a user's talk page if they make an edit you disagree with ''before'' you go running to sysops with cries of vandalism. It's also considered polite to post with your main instead of creating a sockpuppet account to level spurious accusations of vandalism. Lastly, yes, I have ''a'' character with MCDU tags in the area and have been playing zombie. All of those 'burbs are at the ''very dangerous'' level, being mostly in ruins and full of zombies with The Dead tags. It's not hard to add 2 + 2 and get 4. --[[User:Dragonshardz|Dragonshardz]] ([[User talk:Dragonshardz|talk]]) 15:27, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
::Agreed, it's poor form to submit a case in situations like these before discussing the matter with the other user, and even ''if'' we find that your information was inaccurate, you have no history of vandalism, so I'd be inclined to let you off with little more than a soft warning that you remain factual and that subsequent incidents of this sort may not be taken so lightly. If this case was brought frivolously, however, we may be investigating Fact checker a bit. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 16:33, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
:::I'm in the mentioned area, as I've said, and based on what I can see marking those suburbs as VD is justified. High zombie presence, lots of ruins or buildings under attack, etc. --[[User:Dragonshardz|Dragonshardz]] ([[User talk:Dragonshardz|talk]]) 17:00, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
::::I hear you, but hopefully it's obvious why I want to wait on a known-neutral source of information, given your involvement in this case. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 17:50, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
:::::Hello. As a member of The Dead I'm not a neutral party, but I would like to point out that a street level sweep of the mentioned suburbs is likely not going to reflect our true presence there. As our instructions are to stay off the streets and sleep inside any ruined buildings to prevent repair/recadding. [[User:JAZED|JAZED]] ([[User talk:JAZED|talk]]) 02:50, 10 May 2018 (UTC) 
::::::^And certainly I'd trust the view of whatever group is most active there, unless someone gives evidence to contradict the reports! --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 02:56, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
Okay, I just heard word back from some of my old pals who were able to check out the area. They didn't get through all of it, but they're describing West Becktown and Dunnel Hills as mostly ruined with a low presence of both survivors and zombies. They're describing it as more closely resembling a Ghost Town than a Very Dangerous suburb, but given that there's a lot of overlap between the two statuses (i.e. anything with lots of ruins could conceivably go either way, depending on how many zombies a person observes), I'm going with '''Not Vandalism''' unless Stelar or one of the 'sops. comes back with very different information. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 18:07, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
:Precisely my assessment. You'll notice that rather than reverting those suburbs back to Very Dangerous when they were vandalized earlier today I went ahead and changed them to Ghost Town. Given that the assertion [[User:Fact checker|Fact checker]] made is patently false given the areas he claimed are "Intact" are thoroughly ruined, I think some investigation into frivolous vandal reporting is warranted. --[[User:Envious|Envious]] ([[User talk:Envious|talk]]) 18:22, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
^What they said. I don't actually think the accuracy of the report is all that important, unless it is repeatedly and deliberatly false info. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 02:55, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
Relevant to this complaint, I've reverted their addition of The Dead 2.0 to [[Suburb]], as changes to the noteworthy suburbs section warrants discussion (as stated by the talk page) first. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 01:08, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
:Whatever. --[[User:Dragonshardz|Dragonshardz]] ([[User talk:Dragonshardz|talk]]) 01:23, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
I scoured the Dunnell Hills talk page, and saw nothing regarding such a rule. Mind pointing that out for us? [[User:Sniper4625|Sniper4625]] ([[User talk:Sniper4625|talk]]) 01:46, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
:Suburb talk page. Additions are voted upon under the section [[Talk:Suburb#Simple_Guidelines_for_Noteworthiness]]. It doesn't specify ''changes'' rather than ''additions'', but I would recommend submitting it there nonetheless, as the edit itself seems to be contentious in nature. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 02:27, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
::So, just to confirm...changes are not an explicit rule then? [[User:Sniper4625|Sniper4625]] ([[User talk:Sniper4625|talk]]) 02:40, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
:::I would push that the need for discussion is within the spirit of the rules rather than the letter, but you already know that. What you've said it correct. It's not a codified rule. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 03:45, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
::The only person who seems to think it was a contentious edit is you, since you're the one who reverted it. This report was entirely about Danger Map edits someone disagreed with and didn't bother talking to me about before they went haring off to screech about vandalism. --[[User:Dragonshardz|Dragonshardz]] ([[User talk:Dragonshardz|talk]]) 02:42, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
:::If you'd like to frame it that way, you can, I have no problem with it but I'm prepared to make the case that the edit in question should be agreed upon by committee. It's a contentious edit, because it's a POV declaration by the group who put it there, unilaterally. And it's not even about the historical noteworthy, it's about current status of the suburb and the group, which may not have been the case a month ago, and theoretically, could not be the case in a month. That makes it unsuitable to be placed on a section about historical suburbs and their groups.
:::This isn't the first time people have tried to bolster their own ego by having a group put there. And doing so without discussion has always had it reverted. My suggestion is to bring it to discussion. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 03:45, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
::::Blah blah I'm important blah blah. Maybe I'd care what you had to say if you didn't pile onto a spurious "vandalism" report made by an obvious sockpuppet. --[[User:Dragonshardz|Dragonshardz]] ([[User talk:Dragonshardz|talk]]) 05:09, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
:::::Don't equate wanting the right decision and a willingness to explain it with unwarranted self-importance. You can care about what I have to say or not, I don't give a shit, I'm telling you what's going on. Ignore it if you want. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 05:21, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
::::::Yessuh, massah sysop. --[[User:Dragonshardz|Dragonshardz]] ([[User talk:Dragonshardz|talk]]) 05:40, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
:::::::I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic but in case you're not, I'll just quickly get this out of the way... I'm not a sysop. I'm just a normal user... I just try too hard. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 05:48, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
:<s>Can we wrap this up and get the official verdict already? Or is this going to just sit until Aichon comes back from his vacation?</s> Missed the verdict in the mix, thanks, cheers. --[[User:Dragonshardz|Dragonshardz]] ([[User talk:Dragonshardz|talk]]) 20:05, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Chiming in very late with a '''not vandalism'''. The suburb danger statuses are '''the''' part of the wiki most designed to be corrected/adjusted with extreme frequency by interested users. In addition, the boundaries of what constitutes what status are vague and arguable on purpose. I doubt I'd ever accept an A/VB case based on a danger status dispute, unless it's a user clearly lying and manipulating the status in order to e.g. lure players or alter their behavior, but even that would be extremely difficult to prove. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 20:09, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
===[[User:Anti-EU]]===
{{v|Anti-EU|Vandalism|Banned forever}}
Banned for page blanking. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 22:18, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
===[[User:A.R.M.P.I.T O.D.O.R I.S F.U.C.K.E.D]] ''et al.''===
{{v|A.R.M.P.I.T O.D.O.R I.S F.U.C.K.E.D|Permaban Evasion|Perma'd Again}}
Our "friend" is back with some spam pages and a boatload of sockpuppets. --{{User:Armpit_Odor/dnsig}} 19:49, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
:'''Dealt with.''' They're all banned, blocked, and cleaned up after. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 21:25, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
===Imp Accounts===
{{v|TheJаck|Imp Account|Perma'd}}
{{v|The Jаck|Imp Account|Perma'd}}
Not to be confused with [[User:The Jack|The Jack]].
I just noticed these in the Recent Changes and saw that the latter copied [[User:The Jack]]'s page verbatim, clearly intending to pose as him. Checkuser shows that they're the same person. The latter is using a Unicode character that resembles an "a" to make their name look identical to [[User:The Jack|The Jack]]. Anyway, given that every single edit from an impersonation account is inherently vandalism, we've always treated them as vandal accounts and '''Permabanned''' them as such, which I'll go ahead and do here in just a moment. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 18:04, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
:You deserve a medal for these. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 22:18, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
==April==
===[[User:Dead]]===
{{v|Dead|3EV|Permaban}}
[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Special:Contributions/Dead yawn] {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 04:50, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
:Obvious 3EV and '''Perma’d''' as such. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 05:03, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
::Oh, it's also worth mentioning that this account belongs to the serial vandal from below, so it's not just 3EV: it's ban evasion. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 16:03, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
===[[User:The Jack]]===
{{v|The Jack|Not vandalism|None}}
Repeatedly blanking pages. I believe this is considered vandalism via [[UDWiki:Vandalism#Some examples of vandalism]]. Also worth noting that being that this is a wiki, no user "owns" pages. The purpose is to document, not provide a biased viewpoint or be one user's personal playground. --{{unsigned|Tenantryd|15:43, 28 April 2018 (UTC)}}
:I’m afraid you’re grossly mistaken. The page you yourself linked to discusses how page ownership works on this wiki. Group’s own their own group pages. Users own their own user pages. The remainder of the pages are public and can be edited by anyone, provided you maintain a neutral point of view in your edits (NPOV). The Jack is welcome to blank their own page, should they choose, and your attempt to bait them into doing so in the hope that it would get them in trouble is misguided. Also, you’re banned again. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 15:53, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
It's our own page. Of which you kept repeatedly attempting to vandalize (notice how the sig is not signed like a typical coward?)...and miserable failing. Cheers Scrub. L.2.P. :D --[[User:The Jack|The Jack]] ([[User talk:The Jack|talk]]) 15:50, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
Just a heads up. Now they're changing images uploaded to the Wiki. Not sure where to put this, but I'll notify Aichon, since he seems to be currently on duty, on his page as well to be safe. --[[User:The Jack|The Jack]] ([[User talk:The Jack|talk]]) 16:17, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
:Just to summarise, Aichon has beaten me to these and I agree with all these separate rulings.--[[User:Rosslessness|<span style="color: MidnightBlue ">R</span><span style="color: Navy">o</span><span style="color: DarkBlue">s</span><span style="color: MediumBlue">s</span><span style="color: RoyalBlue"></span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness|<span style="color: RoyalBlue">l</span><span style="color: CornflowerBlue">e</span><span style="color: SkyBlue">s</span><span style="color: LightskyBlue">s</span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness/Quiz|<span style="color: LightBlue">n</span><span style="color: PowderBlue">e</span>]][[Monroeville Many|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]][[The Great Suburb Group Massacre|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]]<sup>[[Location Page Building Toolkit|<span style="color: DarkRed">Want a Location Image?]] </span> </sup>  08:55, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Nice try, please try again soon. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 04:17, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
===[[User:Overarms]]===
{{v|Overarms|Vandal alt|Perma'd}}
More of the same on our page. Same zerg cheat. Consider all other accounts modifying our group page (outside the discussion tab) to be continuos petition for Vandal banning. Thank You --[[User:The Jack|The Jack]] ([[User talk:The Jack|talk]]) 15:33, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
ALSO, given this specific scenario. Should this new page, http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/The_Joke, also be removed as well? --[[User:The Jack|The Jack]] ([[User talk:The Jack|talk]]) 15:51, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
'''Banned and deleted.''' {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 16:32, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
:Just to summarise, Aichon has beaten me to these and I agree with all these separate rulings.--[[User:Rosslessness|<span style="color: MidnightBlue ">R</span><span style="color: Navy">o</span><span style="color: DarkBlue">s</span><span style="color: MediumBlue">s</span><span style="color: RoyalBlue"></span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness|<span style="color: RoyalBlue">l</span><span style="color: CornflowerBlue">e</span><span style="color: SkyBlue">s</span><span style="color: LightskyBlue">s</span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness/Quiz|<span style="color: LightBlue">n</span><span style="color: PowderBlue">e</span>]][[Monroeville Many|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]][[The Great Suburb Group Massacre|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]]<sup>[[Location Page Building Toolkit|<span style="color: DarkRed">Want a Location Image?]] </span> </sup>  08:55, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
===[[User:Abundants]]===
{{v|Abundants|Vandal alt|Permaban}}
New User made right after last User Starlingt was blocked by Aichon. Same unoriginal edit attempted. Obviously this guy feels so impotent in game, that he's desperately trying to bother us here. Fortunately, while our group finds it laughable, and pretty damn sad, it's still important to file this request. Is there a way to do a more indepth search of their information (I know IP can be viewed, but do not know what else can be determined and would like to learn?). I'd guess they're using the whatever IP cheats they also use in game, but perhaps they have some other account(s) on here, where they have stuff they consider valuable, that can be removed? Seems this person is desperate to be noticed, so taking away their contributions, and recorded history for the long term, may finally give them pause to their futile attempts to terrorize? --[[User:The Jack|The Jack]] ([[User talk:The Jack|talk]]) 15:06, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
Same m.o., same time, and elements in the logs point towards them being the same person. '''Perma’d''' as a vandal alt. As for nuking other stuff, it all depends on if we can connect them to other accounts. The more they evade, the more info we glean and the more likely we are to catch onto anything like that. If they do it again, you can just report the subsequent accounts under here and we’ll nuke them accordingly. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 15:19, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
===[[User:Sniper4625]] and [[User:DHPDWiki]]===
{{v|Sniper4625|Vandalism|Warned}}
{{v|DHPDWiki|Vandalism|Warned}}
Like the case below, [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=The_Jack&diff=prev&oldid=2352026 both] [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=The_Jack&curid=192707&diff=2352041&oldid=2352040 accounts] have made vandal edits to [[The Jack]] page. The former does have previous edits, all to the Malton Globetrotters talk page in 2012. The latter has the sole vandal edit done in a similar manner to Sniper4625, so I suspect they are likely the same person. I also suspect this is related to the Starlingt case below due to the continued targeting of this particular page. - {{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 08:29, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
:This and the below strikes me as meat puppetry for the most part. It isn’t conclusive whether these two are the same person or not, so I think we’ll be treating them as separate accounts. Given the prior history of the one and a lack of edits for the other, I’m thinking '''warning''' for both. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 14:36, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
UPDATE:
Sniper4625 made a comment on the false Aichon Misconduct case where he said to me the same thing that one of the zerg vandalism accounts made yesterday (The Reel Jack Yocum). I copied the quote of that reverted edit and added it to my repose on the Misconduct case.
Since he was already issued a warning, and it's connected to a huge issue, I think (if you agree with his culpability) that this account should be permanently removed to set a precendence for that behavior and as an example. Regards --[[User:The Jack|The Jack]] ([[User talk:The Jack|talk]]) 04:16, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
:Check the administrative guidelines linked from the top. We don’t just randomly ban people for bad behavior. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 04:56, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
::Apologies, but either Im either confused, or just not explaining myself well enough. So though it was erroneously commented on under the ridiculous Aichon misconduct case, since deleted by Dance, this Sniper4625 said the same comment one of the zerg alts said in a reverted vandalizing attempt (The Reel Jack Yocum). I posted the quoted information there from the reverted file by The Reel to compare with what Sniper said. I can go retrieve it if it needs to be officially posted here. My point, is that if it connects this Sniper4625 to a account(s) that are already permabanned for abuse, then shouldnt the Sniper4625 alt also be banned for vandalism as well? Adding to the fact that there is also already a consideration for warning. It would seem that this account is one of the roots needed to be removed rather than just snipping the pointless branches. Correct?  Just want to say that while im not out for blood, and this all has obviously been more trouble to you guys than me innhaving to deal,with it, i do think extreme measures may be required in this instance simply due to the volume, frequency, and outright lack of respect this unrepentant  offender has Shown in regards to their repeat offenses.  --[[User:The Jack|The Jack]] ([[User talk:The Jack|talk]]) 13:47, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
:::Sorry, I forgot that not everyone speaks wiki jargon. Back up above, I referenced my belief that they were "meat puppets", i.e. distinct people whose activities are being encouraged or directed by a person or group off the wiki, which was my determination based on the evidence in the logs (their use of similar rhetoric to a banned vandal is not sufficient evidence of a connection). Sysops assume good faith (as best we can), don't punish people for perceived associations, and try to give newcomers every effort to become a contributing member of the community. We have a series of escalating corrective measures (detailed in the guidelines) that we use for dealing with vandalism, with permabans being reserved for repeat offenders or those who clearly joined the wiki for no purpose other than to vandalize it (e.g. spambots, three-edit vandals a.k.a. "3EV", etc.), neither of which appears to be the case here. If you'd like sysops to have more freedom to ban people willy-nilly without going through those escalations first, you'll need to get the wiki's policies changed, since we act according to them. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 16:01, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Apparently I got a warning? News to me. But I sure didn't do anything worthy of a permaban, and the fact that I'm so far under your skin as I clearly am is infinitely hilarious. TRJY ain't me, so looks like your snitch attempt has misfired. {{unsigned|Sniper4625}}
:Yes the man who is apparently sitting here while horde of idiots dogpile onto the wiki to pester him and get banned, your pals are definitely the ones under ''his'' skin. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 04:48, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
::I don't know who you are, but all you have to do is read any of the quite large amount of words the Zerger has published today to get the truth of the matter. Thank you for your attention to good signing conventions though I will strive to do better on this, the Urban Dead Wiki.{{unsigned|Sniper4625}}
:::What takes more effort, talking like an ass for 4 paragraphs or making countless fake accounts with different IPs to harass someone? He's definitely not coming off as the dipshit in this instance. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 04:54, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
::::Provide your proof, good sir, as you seem to think you're some sort of SysOP, going around closing Vandal cases and the like. Provide your proof. I do find it hilarious that you, an uninvolved party, are so willing to leap to the defense of a Zerger. Why?[[User:Sniper4625]]
:::::Oh trust me, I'm not closing this case. That's none of my business.
:::::I also think you might be mistaken. I don't give a shit about who is zerging and who isn't. The only thing I care about is order on the wiki. Conflict and drama bothers me, and even more so when it's because of pure idiocy. I refuse to give a shit about what each party is saying when it's being said in such a preposterously idiotic and futile way.
:::::Bringing all of your issues to the wiki solves nothing, and only serves to bother people who care about it as a resource. Neither party, right or wrong, is going to change their behaviour based on a short-lived wiki harassment campaign. If anything, it might strengthen his resolve because it gives him attention. Keep giving it if you want. Doesn't change how I feel about how stupid this all is. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 05:10, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
:You have not received a warning. I’m waiting on other sysops to weigh in before taking action. Should you receive one, we’ll notify you on your talk page. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 04:56, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
::''Still'' waiting to hear from other sysops. If I don't hear anything within 24 hours, I'll go with the warning. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 19:32, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
:::I'm not seeing that these two are the same person. So a '''warning''' for Sniper for the page clearing makes sense, if you'd like to go for it. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 00:33, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
I '''warned''' both of them. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 22:29, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
===[[User:Starlingt]]===
{{v|Starlingt|3EV|Permaban}}
We are requesting this newly created user account be banned for multiple attempts to vandalize our group page since yesterday. They even undid the revision that was done by Rosslessness, which may be another sort of infraction? In their most recent edits they mentioned Doritos, which is also what another user, sniper4625, presented as well with their unwanted edit yesterday too. We would postulate that this is someone very familiar with this site, and likely a longstanding user here too afraid to comment with their real user name and IP address.
Fee free to let us know what else we need to do to facilitate this process further. Thank you. --[[User:The Jack|The Jack]] ([[User talk:The Jack|talk]]) 01:45, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
:I’m inclined to Perma as a 3EV, but I’ll wait for other opinions lest someone disagree. And I doubt Sniper4625 is the same person as Starlingt. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 04:36, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
::[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=The_Jack&curid=192707&diff=2352074&oldid=2352072 They're not letting up]. Very likely just a vandal account at this stage. -- {{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 08:15, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
::There's nothing constructive about what they are doing, and they have made more than three vandal edits. But I guess wait and see what they do now that you have warned them? {{User:Stelar/sig}} 11:00, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
:::I just did that in the hope that they might stop if they knew that those sorts of actions were unwelcome on the wiki. Plus, I didn’t want the edit warring continuing as I went to sleep. Based on their response on my talk page and lack of additional vandalism, however, maybe they’re willing to turn over a new leaf? I don’t think it’s possible to believe they were acting in good faith, but assuming they don’t do it again, I’m okay giving them a formal warning and being done. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 14:27, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
::::Hello Aichon, they just did it again about 6 minutes before you posted your last message. I have already undid their last revision, but I believe that takes them past the formal warning stage? --[[User:The Jack|The Jack]] ([[User talk:The Jack|talk]]) 14:39, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
:::::Yeah, just saw that. I’m back to thinking 3EV and '''Perma''' and will go ahead and do so in the interest of bringing this to a close. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 14:43, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
::::::Understood and Appreciated. I'm sure this is more annoying to you guys than it is to me or anyone in our group. Cheers. --[[User:The Jack|The Jack]] ([[User talk:The Jack|talk]]) 14:45, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
We would also like to mention that we have openly offered for anyone, including detractors, to leave open commentary of the Discussion part of our group page if they have something they wish to convey. But this offender seems bent on simply attempting to be annoying, infantile, and destructive only. --[[User:The Jack|The Jack]] ([[User talk:The Jack|talk]]) 02:07, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
====Summary====
FYI for any sysops coming in after the fact, I've been permabanning all accounts and IPs associated with this user, of which there were (and may yet be?) quite a few (if you checkuser the accounts, you should notice some fairly obvious patterns in the logs that I'd rather not disclose here). I also went ahead and protected the relevant pages for autoconfirmed users only, at least temporarily. I believe everything is dealt with at this point, but I wouldn't mind someone checking my work. Also, the vandal decided to launch a Misconduct case against me, so be sure to rule on it. ;) {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 16:38, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
For future reference, here's the list so far:
*{{vndl|Starlingt}}
*{{vndl|Overarms}}
*{{vndl|Abundants}}
*{{vndl|Tenantryd}}
*{{vndl|Ruddyc}}
*{{vndl|Vasel}}
*{{vndl|Civet}}
*{{vndl|Hatredo}}
*{{vndl|Thaiq}}
*{{vndl|Simplex}}
*{{vndl|Uxurious}}
*{{vndl|Sheept}}
*{{vndl|Kinsmani}}
*{{vndl|Ricocheta}}
*{{vndl|The Real Jack Yocum}}
Fun times. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 16:49, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
:And another:
:*{{vndl|The Reel Jack Yocum}}
:{{User:Aichon/Signature}} 02:33, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Also:
*User: The Joke was snuck in there right before The Reel Jack Yocum. --[[User:The Jack|The Jack]] ([[User talk:The Jack|talk]]) 03:22, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Dragonshardz&diff=next&oldid=2411851 Has] [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Dragonshardz&diff=next&oldid=2411923 repeatedly] [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Dragonshardz&diff=next&oldid=2411937 replaced] their user talk page with a redirect to a group talk page, including after [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Dragonshardz&diff=next&oldid=2411798 being told that that is not allowed] as users need to be contactable on their talk pages. Has also done so on [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Fistbump_Jackson&curid=194759&diff=2411941&oldid=2411938 another user's talk page] after that redirect was reverted by <s>me</s> DDR as well.


Greetings, I hope I am also allowed to add something to this message. It might be relevant. I have just finished speaking with my predecessor, the user who created "The Jack Yocum" page for our group's previous incarnation, and he directed me to view that page's history. There was a similar situation there, though far less pronounced, with a vandal created the "Hunter of America" wiki account to attack that page. The character "Hunter of America" is a member of our group, in game, but was never created by us on this site. Hunter was a particularly adept thorn, at the time, to a player zerging Shearbank with alts that literally populated the whole burg. Anyway, looking into the Hunter of America wiki user account may, I hope, provide a link with these accounts as well. Regards --[[User:The Jack|The Jack]] ([[User talk:The Jack|talk]]) 17:09, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
I'm not bring Fistbump to A/VB since they only made the redirect once and Dragonshardz did so the second time, but will keep monitoring. <s>How do people feel about me protecting the talk pages in non-redirected state while the case is carried out to prevent an unnecessary edit war?</s> <small>(nvm, see below)</small> (And for reference Dragonshardz currently has two warnings from previous cases, so this would be a 24 hour ban.) {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 18:44, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
:Actually, nevermind on the protecting talk page issue. I'm looking back through precedent and think protecting the page would be self-defeating; I'll continue to revert the redirects, if needed, until this case is concluded. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 19:14, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
::Per the [[UDWiki:Specific_Case_Editing_Guidelines|Specific Case Editing Guidelines]], ''my'' talk page belongs solely to ''me'', and I can do whatever the hell I damn well please on it. I logically cannot be vandalizing my own property, and the person who would be able to accuse me of "vandalizing" Fistbump's Talk page is Fistbump. Not you. There is no policy on the wiki that requires my Talk page to be "usable to contact" me, or that I cannot redirect it to another Talk page as I wish. In short, go soak your head. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 19:33, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
::Also, every time you revert my edit to my talk page, I get notified that I have a "new message" which is something I clearly do not want, as evidenced by the redirect existing, the change summaries, and my request to RadicalWhig to please not mess with my talk page. He's able to abide by that, why can't you? Or do you simply want to harass me with constant notifications of blank text? --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 19:43, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
::To the sysop team: I'm currently collating the relevant precedent to link here. (Also making a longer version in my userspace.) I can't find anything specific about redirects, but there is widespread precedent that User Talk pages must be usable by both sysops and the general community to contact the user, and obstructions to its usability for this are not allowed. Feel free to hold on ruling til I get that together, hopefully in about an hour. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 21:18, 25 March 2021 (UTC)


===[[User:Anti-Soros IS BACK!!!]]===
Ok, here it is: There has long been a guiding principle to rulings that user talk pages must be usable to contact that user by both the sysops and the userbase at large, with the sole exception of banned users, whose talk pages are protected. The user talk page is the first stop for anyone discussing edits elsewhere on the wiki. There are innumerable examples of "take this to the admin talk page or your talk page" if you go back through the A/VB and other admin archives. The user talk page is ''the'' place to have discussion, including discussion the user in question doesn't like.
{{v|User:Anti-Soros IS BACK!!!|Vandalism|Perma'd}}
He really isn't --[[User:Rosslessness|<span style="color: MidnightBlue ">R</span><span style="color: Navy">o</span><span style="color: DarkBlue">s</span><span style="color: MediumBlue">s</span><span style="color: RoyalBlue"></span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness|<span style="color: RoyalBlue">l</span><span style="color: CornflowerBlue">e</span><span style="color: SkyBlue">s</span><span style="color: LightskyBlue">s</span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness/Quiz|<span style="color: LightBlue">n</span><span style="color: PowderBlue">e</span>]][[Monroeville Many|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]][[The Great Suburb Group Massacre|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]]<sup>[[Location Page Building Toolkit|<span style="color: DarkRed">Want a Location Image?]] </span> </sup>  14:38, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
:This dude really seems to be into skunks, on top of the rest of it {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 15:27, 10 April 2018 (UTC)


===[[User:‎Soros is a cocoon with bent dick]]===
A user making their talk page unusable is not allowed.[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning/Archive/2011_05#DerpDerp] Doing so is vandalism if it is intentional, but not if it is an honest coding mistake.[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning/Archive/2008_12#User:Umbrellaemployee_.282.29] This includes to the extent that others may e.g. reduce image size in order to make a user's talk pages useable.[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning/Archive/2011_12#User:Generaloberst] Users can request that their talk page be deleted, but cannot, for example, demand their talk pages remain deleted/uncreated by other users, as they are needed as a point of contact.[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning/Archive/2011_04#User:Revenant] I don't believe a user has previously attempted to use redirecting to circumvent this, but it stands in clear comparison to the prior examples. (This is excerpted from a [[User:Bob Moncrief/Precedent Collation#User Talk Pages|much longer text I just collated in my userspace]] if you want more details.) {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 21:53, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
{{v|Soros is a cocoon with bent dick|Vandalism|Perma'd}}
:Neither precedent or principle are policy. Redirecting my talk page to another page doesn't make my talk page unusable. It encourages people not to use it. And again, logically, it is not possible to vandalize something ''that belongs to you''. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 22:01, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Created a bunch of spam pages. --{{User:Armpit_Odor/dnsig}} 20:21, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
::Precedent is a big part of how the wiki has operated since 2006. If you're opposed to that, I encourage you to craft a policy proposal that invalidates precedent and requires all policies to be explicit.
:Also, creating a bunch of sockpuppets. For example, [[User:Anti-Soros 005]] --{{User:Armpit_Odor/dnsig}} 20:27, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
::Redirecting your talk page significantly hinders a user's ability to edit or post on it. Also, you absolutely can vandalize your own user talk page, for example by posting something that violates TOS there.[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning/Archive/2009_09#User:Sexylegsread] {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 22:22, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
::Looks to be the Siptar guy from last month based on IP. I've '''perma'd''' the one you linked and blocked its IP, but it'll take me a few minutes before I can get to the rest. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 21:09, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
:Also the VERY FIRST CASE you link to in order to back up that your claim that my edits to ''my'' talk page are vandalism was ruled to not be vandalism. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 22:06, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
:::Okay, blocked all of the accounts linked to that IP, blocked the IP, and nuked the pages. If I missed anything, let me know. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 21:38, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
::It was ruled not vandalism because the user fixed it before it could become vandalism. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 22:22, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
:::Either way it still isn't vandalism for me to redirect my talk page. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 22:44, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
:AND that case is about having text or other material outside the normal page area, which is not what a redirect does, so it's not even barely fucking related! --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 22:11, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
::It has the same effect of hindering a user's ability to post on your talk page. If anything, making a page a redirect makes it more difficult to do so, especially for those who have less familiarity with wiki operations like the (+) button. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 22:22, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
:::It requires them to ''click a single clearly visible link'' to go back to the talk page. It's not that hard. {{unsigned|Dragonshardz}}


===[[User:Geismodo]]===
'''Not Vandalism''' - Dragonshardz wants to do something with their talk page and clearly believes they have the right to do it. I can't in good faith have them warned/banned right away for something they don't ''realise'' they can't do. However, Bob ''is'' right, user talk pages must be reasonably accessible for the function of the wiki. That essentially overrules talk page rules or any other personal touches one wants to add to their home page.
{{v|Geismodo|3 edit rule|Perma}}
Sockpuppeting and impersonation. [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Clubbed_to_Death&diff=2351524&oldid=2351523] [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Clubbed_to_Death&diff=2351522&oldid=2351520] --{{User:Armpit_Odor/dnsig}} 18:18, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
:3 Edit rule - Also stuck a semi protection on the page in question. --[[User:Rosslessness|<span style="color: MidnightBlue ">R</span><span style="color: Navy">o</span><span style="color: DarkBlue">s</span><span style="color: MediumBlue">s</span><span style="color: RoyalBlue"></span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness|<span style="color: RoyalBlue">l</span><span style="color: CornflowerBlue">e</span><span style="color: SkyBlue">s</span><span style="color: LightskyBlue">s</span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness/Quiz|<span style="color: LightBlue">n</span><span style="color: PowderBlue">e</span>]][[Monroeville Many|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]][[The Great Suburb Group Massacre|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]]<sup>[[Location Page Building Toolkit|<span style="color: DarkRed">Want a Location Image?]] </span> </sup>  20:15, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
::As an addendum, checkuser seems to confirm that this one is yet another vandal alt of the below cases, since it's showing a match with Infernozerg when the IP range is slightly widened. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 16:10, 9 April 2018 (UTC)


===[[User:Infernozerg]]===
Some relevant precedent. [[UDWiki:Administration/Protections/2008/January#User_Talk:Nalikill_2|A user cannot have their talk page protected for periods that they are actually active on the wiki]], for the specific reason that it their obligation to be contactable if they are contributing to this wonderful website. [[UDWiki:Administration/Protections/2008/April#User_pages|Users like Finis Valorum thus needed to request talk page protections only when declaring they were to be absent from the wiki]] and their talk pages would have to [[UDWiki:Administration/Protections/2008/May#User_talk:Finis_Valorum|be unprotected once they returned]]. [[User_talk:Iscariot|Iscariot's talk page]] had [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Iscariot/Archive&diff=1260616&oldid=1253314 stupid rules] in an attempt to literally forbid admins from posting on his page "or he would misconduct them". It didn't work and as I recall he never bothered testing it cause even he knew it was dumb. He removed them a year or so later.
{{v|Wangguy|Vandalism|Banned forever}}
{{v|Infernozerg|Vandal alt|Banned forever}}
{{v|Blowme|Vandal alt|Banned forever}}
Probably another sockpuppet of [[User:Wangguy]]. [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Clubbed_to_Death&diff=2351512&oldid=2351496] --{{User:Armpit_Odor/dnsig}} 15:24, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
:I got him. We should ban all the associated accounts at this point. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 16:16, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
::I’d suggest this should be a second warning for Wangguy, given that he did it after he had already received the warning from Bob. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 20:45, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
:::Is this all the same guy, no? It's good to give the benefit of the doubt for a new user, but he hasn't done anything else except vandalize. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 20:54, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
::::Infernoguy and sirguy are using the same IP, which I've now blocked. --[[User:Rosslessness|<span style="color: MidnightBlue ">R</span><span style="color: Navy">o</span><span style="color: DarkBlue">s</span><span style="color: MediumBlue">s</span><span style="color: RoyalBlue"></span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness|<span style="color: RoyalBlue">l</span><span style="color: CornflowerBlue">e</span><span style="color: SkyBlue">s</span><span style="color: LightskyBlue">s</span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness/Quiz|<span style="color: LightBlue">n</span><span style="color: PowderBlue">e</span>]][[Monroeville Many|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]][[The Great Suburb Group Massacre|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]]<sup>[[Location Page Building Toolkit|<span style="color: DarkRed">Want a Location Image?]] </span> </sup>  21:03, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
:::::Have also blocked [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Special:Contributions/Blowme Blowme], and the IP that account edited from. At this point I'd say [[User:Wangguy]] counts as a 3eV, since none of the original account's edits were constructive either, so I'd support a perma of the Wangguy account as well. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 15:20, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
::::::Agreed, and '''Perma'd''' appropriately. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 15:50, 9 April 2018 (UTC)


===[[User:Sirguy]] & [[User:Clubbedtodeathsucks]]===
And there's also the general "function of the wiki" precedents that come into play here. Kind of. [[UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/Prohibiting Content Outside of the Normal Page Area|You can't do certain things on this wiki that make the function of the wiki more difficult for general users]]. [[UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning/Archive/2015#User:_Revenant|same goes for random crap that breaks basic wiki functions]]. These examples aren't directly related obviously. But they are examples of the Sysop's mandate to ensure the wiki can run smoothly, as it's intended, at the base level.
{{v|Wangguy|Vandalism|Warned}}
{{v|Clubbedtodeathsucks|Vandal Alt|Perma'd}}
{{v|Sirguy|Vandal Alt|Perma'd}}
Good old fashioned vandalism. [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Clubbed_to_Death&diff=2351438&oldid=2351282]. Looks similar to [[User:Wangguy]] who was doing similar stuff to the same page. [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Clubbed_to_Death&diff=2351209&oldid=2351206] {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 01:04, 6 April 2018 (UTC)


Likely a sock puppet of Sirguy in DDR's report below. --{{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 22:00, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Basically, it's unfair to ban you for something you didn't know for sure that you couldn't do. But, like the [[UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning/Archive/2011_05#DerpDerp|predecent Bob posted above]], now you do. That means if you continue with this edit war I'll vote vandalism next time. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 22:30, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
:I've combined the two since they're clearly the same M.O. Technically both have exactly three edits and thus count as 3eV-eligible. They're also with the same M.O. as [[Special:Contributions/Wangguy|Wangguy]], whose target is also Clubbed to Death, and which I meentioned in my welcome message on [[User talk:Wangguy|their talk page]]. If others are OK with it, I may checkuser all three and see if they're alts of the same person. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 13:40, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
:Redirecting the page doesn't make it more difficult for general users to leave a message. There's a link right under the title of the page it redirects to that takes you back to my talk page without being redirected. I'm not doing anything that prevents people from editing my talk page, just encouraging them to ''not''. It's absolutely ridiculous to state that it's possible for me to vandalize my own talk page. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 22:42, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
::Having checked, I'd suggest we '''Permaban''' Clubbedtodeathsucks and Sirguy as vandal alt accounts and then apply this case as a '''Warning''' on Wangguy. I'd have been willing to accept that he ''may'' not have known better, but the fact that he's using multiple accounts tells me that he knows he's up to no good. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 19:38, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
::Vandalism isn't something that can only occur on some pages and not on others. It's literally just a bad faith edit. It can be done by anyone, anywhere. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 22:57, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
:::[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Clubbed_to_Death&diff=2351479&oldid=2351477 He's still at it]. - {{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 20:44, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
:::A redirect on a talk page which by {{WIKILAW}} ''belongs to me'' is a bad faith edit based on what policy, exactly? --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 23:03, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
::::[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Clubbed_to_Death&curid=125241&diff=2351496&oldid=2351495 And again]. - {{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 09:24, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
::::The creation of that redirect was not vandalism. I said so above. The continuing to do so after being told it goes against the sysop's interpretation of past precedent & policy, is bad faith. Policy dictates sysops are allowed to interpret on a case-by-case basis to this degree. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 23:43, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
:::::There is no policy that I cannot redirect my own talk page, nor is there precedent for this specific issue. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 00:03, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
::::::Exactly. So the decision is 100% up to the interpretation by the sysops as explicitly stated in the [[UDWiki:Administration/Guidelines#General_Conduct|guidelines]], my reasoning of which is collated in the above links and examples provided by myself and Bob. You are welcome to your interpretation and it is entirely your choice to push it as hard as you are pushing it. I expect the result of that will be that by the end of this endeavour you will have helped create the precedent you seem so interested in us producing. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 00:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
:::::::I'm only pushing it because Bob is a tedious fuck who decided that the best way to coerce me into doing what ''he'' wants is making a VB case. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 01:04, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
:::Y'all's argument is the same as telling someone that they cannot paint the inside of their owned home a specific color, and now that they have been told this, they will go to jail if they paint the inside of their house a specific color. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 23:07, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
:::::All I'm reading here is that you think I should have voted vandalism straight away because that fits the standards of real-life criminal justice more. This is not real life, your talk page is not your house. It's a wiki. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 23:43, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
::::::My talk page is ''my'' talk page. Why is choosing to redirect it to a different talk page such a big fucking deal in the first place? --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 00:03, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
:::::::It's not a big deal at all. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 00:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
::::::::If it's not a big deal, why bother making a VB case about it? Eh, Bob? --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 01:04, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
:::::::::I'm very thankful for this actually as it was a great way to establish a precedent. Sorry you had to be the vector for it, but thanks! {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 01:51, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
::::::::::I didn't '''"have"''' to be the vector for it, you pretentious twat. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 02:35, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
::::The user talk page is more like the mailbox on the front of your house (which is your userpage) — you own it but legally it has to be functional to receive mail there. And I live in a city where by ordinance our mailboxes have to be one of a specific set of colors (mine is dark green). {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 01:51, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
:::::And in this case, you're the neighborhood Karen on the HOA making a big fuss about my shade of green being oh-so-slightly off. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 02:37, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
::::::There's no policy against being a Karen. ;) {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 14:23, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
:::::::Nobody ''likes'' a Karen, Karen. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 15:20, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
::::::::I do! At worst I find them entertaining, at best a challenge to out-Karen. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 19:32, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
:::::::::You find white women who call the cops on Black people for having a cookout ''entertaining''. This explains an uncomfortable number of things about you. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 00:55, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
::::::::::That's not what a Karen is, that's called a racist. Or if that's your definition of Karen then I'm definitely not, I think rules-monger is a much more accurate appellation. Also I think this conversation would at this point be better held on a user talk page rather than on A/VB, so will continue on one if you like. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 01:00, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
:I'm a-ok with this. Would love at least one other sysop to agree with DDR (not vandalism but this is precedent that you cannot redirect your user talk page going forwards) before I officially withdraw the case. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 01:51, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
::Imagine spending hors of your free time to scroll back through 16 years worth of vandal banning data just to stick it to someone who doesn't operate their talk page in the way that you want. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 02:49, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
:::Ehh, it was only ~13 years and ctrl+f is my friend. But that kind of scrolling is what I signed up for when I applied for sysop. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 14:23, 26 March 2021 (UTC)


Due to the ongoing offenses, I've '''perma'd''' Clubbedtodeathsucks & Sirguy and left a '''warning''' on [[User talk:Wangguy|Wangguy's talk page]]. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 13:28, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
* Bob's argument rests on whether changing Dragonshardz's talk page to a redirect makes it impossible (or at least difficult) to contact Dragonshardz directly. However, it takes a single click on <small><font color='grey'>(Redirected from [[User talk:Dragonshardz]])</font></small> to go back onto their page and make a comment, so it's certainly still possible to contact them; it's just mildly annoying and not difficult. Any user is allowed make edits to Dragonshardz's talk page in this manner, and Dragonshardz can revert these talk page edits if they wish. Both of these users can make these edits back and forth endlessly, and neither of the user's edits would be vandalism. If Dragonshardz doesn't want a specific user from using their talk page, they can make an [[A/A]] case. They could also try to make an [[A/A]] case to block any and all users on the wiki from using their talk page, but I don't think an arbitrator would rule in their favour and I'm not sure how such a case would work mechanistically anyways.
* I think a stronger argument is that the redirect could prevent an inexperienced user from directly contacting Dragonshardz, but that's speculative. They may or may not notice the redirect, or understand what a redirect is.
* It matters where the redirect goes to and what is on the page. A point in Dragonshardz's favour is that the redirect directs people to [[Talk:The Dead]], a group of which they are a member (so far as I understand). If the page contained elements that blocked the redirect message, or linked to the main page of an unrelated group (for example), I'd change my conclusion here.
* It's best to not assume that Dragonshardz is being deliberately disruptive. Perhaps they prefer the redirect because "I get notified that I have a "new message" which is something I clearly do not want" (Dragonshardz).
* '''Not vandalism.''' --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 15:59, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
:I'm glad somebody gets it. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 17:49, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
:I understand this — I disagree in that I do think the redirect click constitutes making it difficult to post on the user's talk page, but I'm cool with this ruling. Before we wrap and so I understand, if a user talk page redirected to, say, [[Talk:Main Page]], would that be obstructive enough to count as vandalism? {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 19:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
::I probably wouldn't bother ruling it as such, unless it became common for people trying to reach Drangonshardz to post on [[Talk:Main Page]] by mistake. Call it a pointless redirect, in that case {{tongue}}. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 21:54, 26 March 2021 (UTC)


==March==
As DDR [[User:Rosslessness|<span style="color: MidnightBlue ">R</span><span style="color: Navy">o</span><span style="color: DarkBlue">s</span><span style="color: MediumBlue">s</span><span style="color: RoyalBlue"></span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness|<span style="color: RoyalBlue">l</span><span style="color: CornflowerBlue">e</span><span style="color: SkyBlue">s</span><span style="color: LightskyBlue">s</span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness/Quiz|<span style="color: LightBlue">n</span><span style="color: PowderBlue">e</span>]][[Monroeville Many|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]][[The Great Suburb Group Massacre|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]]<sup>[[Location Page Building Toolkit|<span style="color: DarkRed">Want a Location Image?]] </span> </sup>  19:42, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
===[[User:Hashim thaci is lunatic idiot and loser]], [[User:Албанци су смеђи турски циганови]], [[User:KlaBusters]], and [[User:Siptars are goat fuckers]]===


{{v|Hashim thaci is lunatic idiot and loser|vandalism|blocked forever}}
Closed as '''not vandalism''', although I will be removing the redirect according to the majority of sysop feedback. Same for Fistbump Jackson. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 04:29, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
{{v|Албанци су смеђи турски циганови|vandalism|blocked forever}}
{{v|KlaBusters|vandalism|blocked forever}}
{{v|‎Siptars are goat fuckers|vandalism|blocked forever}}


===[[User:Bob Moncrief]]===
{{v|Bob Moncrief|Not Vandalism|None}}


See all contribs. --{{User:Armpit_Odor/dnsig}} 19:19, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
Has repeatedly reverted edits to my talk page despite clear indications that I do not wish for the redirect on it to be removed. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 20:16, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
:My response is basically the outcome of the above vandalism case, so it should be dealt with before this one. Undoing the edits is a basic administrative action to undo vandalism (the redirect) and thus isn't vandalism. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 21:55, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
::Undoing my edits on my talk page is vandalism, regardless of it being a "basic administrative action to undo vandalism" - which my redirect is not. --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 22:03, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
:::An unwanted edit to a talk page, even repeated, is not vandalism, and a redirect is not a "message" so I didn't remove anything that isn't allowed (actually required, see above) to be removed. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 01:53, 26 March 2021 (UTC)


I believe I blocked all of them and deleted any associated pages. Wish I would have seen this sooner. Thanks Armpit. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 20:42, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
'''Not vandalism''' {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 22:31, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
:Endorsed. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 00:05, 17 March 2018 (UTC)


===[[User:Uberlegen]]===
At best this is a good faith attempt to revert vandalism; at worst it's an edit war. '''Not vandalism'''.  --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 13:59, 26 March 2021 (UTC)


{{v|Uberlegen|vandalism|warning}}
'''Not vandalism''' As the Gnome [[User:Rosslessness|<span style="color: MidnightBlue ">R</span><span style="color: Navy">o</span><span style="color: DarkBlue">s</span><span style="color: MediumBlue">s</span><span style="color: RoyalBlue"></span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness|<span style="color: RoyalBlue">l</span><span style="color: CornflowerBlue">e</span><span style="color: SkyBlue">s</span><span style="color: LightskyBlue">s</span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness/Quiz|<span style="color: LightBlue">n</span><span style="color: PowderBlue">e</span>]][[Monroeville Many|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]][[The Great Suburb Group Massacre|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]]<sup>[[Location Page Building Toolkit|<span style="color: DarkRed">Want a Location Image?]] </span> </sup>  19:45, 26 March 2021 (UTC)


[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Autobots&diff=2350295&oldid=2325071 Blanking] the [[Autobots]] page, despite a [[UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2016|previous warning]] not to do so. --{{User:Armpit_Odor/dnsig}} 19:43, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
Closed as '''not vandalism'''. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 04:29, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
:And I warned him. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 20:48, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
::Endorsed. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 00:05, 17 March 2018 (UTC)


==Archives==
==Archives==
{{VBarchivenav}}
{{VBarchivenav}}

Latest revision as of 04:12, 3 October 2024

Administration Services

Sysop List (Check) | Guidelines | Policies (Discussion) | Promotions (Bureaucrat) | Re-Evaluations

Deletions (Scheduling) | Speedy Deletions | Undeletions | Vandal Banning (Bots) | Vandal Data (De-Escalations)

Protections (Scheduling) | Move Requests | Arbitration | Misconduct | Demotions | Discussion | Sysop Archives

This page is for the reporting of vandalism within the Urban Dead wiki, as defined by vandalism policy. On this wiki, the punishment for Vandalism is temporary banning, but due to security concerns, the ability to mete out this punishment is restricted to System Operators. As such, regular users will need to lodge a report for a Vandal to be banned from the wiki. For consistency and accountability, System Operators are requested to note on this board their actions in dealing with Vandals.

Guidelines for Vandalism Reporting

In dealing with Vandalism, time is often of the essence. As such, we ask that all users include the following information in a Vandalism report:

  • A link to the pages in question.
Preferably bolded for visibility. If the Vandalism is occurring over a sufficiently large number of pages, instead include a time range of the vandalism attempt, or alternatively, a link to the first vandalised page. This allows us to quickly find the damage so we can quickly assess the situation.
  • The user name of the Vandal.
This allows us to more easily identify the culprit, and to check details.
  • A signed datestamp.
For accountability purposes, we ask that you record in your request your user name and the time you lodged the report.
  • Please report at the top.
There's conflict with where to post and a lot of the reports are missed. If it's placed at the top of the page it's probably going to be seen and dealt with.

If you see Vandalism in progress, don't wait for System Operators to deal with it, as there may be no System Operator online at the time. Lodge the report, then start reverting pages back to their original form. This can be done by going to the "History" tab at the top of the page, and finding the last edit before the Vandal's attack. When a System Operator is available, they'll assess the situation, and if the report is legitimate, we will take steps to either warn the vandal, or ban them if they are on their second warning.

If the page is long, you can add new reports by editing the top report and placing your new report above its header in the edit screen.

Before Submitting a Report

  • This page, Vandal Banning, deals with bad-faith breaches of official policy.
  • Interpersonal complaints are better sorted out at UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration.
  • As much as is practical, assume good faith and try to iron out problems with other users one to one, only using this page as a last resort.
  • Avoid submitting reports which are petty.

Vandalism Report Space

Administration Notice
Talk with the user before reporting or accusing someone of vandalism for small edits. In most cases it's simply a case of a new user that doesn't know how this wiki works. Sometimes assuming good faith and speaking with others can avoid a lot of drama, and can even help newbies feel part of this community.
Administration Notice
If you are not a System Operator, the user who made the vandal report, the user being reported, or directly involved in the case, the administration asks that you use the talk page for further discussion. Free-for-all commenting can lead to a less respectful environment.
Administration Notice
Warned users can remove one entry of their warning history every one month and 250 edits after their last warning. To lodge a request for de-escalation, please visit A/DE. You are as responsible for keeping track of your history as the sysops are; In case of a sysop wrongly punishing you due to an outdated history, they might not be punished for their actions.

October 2024

User:Axe Hack

Verdict Incomplete
Action taken None Yet

Submitted a fake vandalism report. Unbelievable. Disappears for 4 years and he's already causing trouble. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 08:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Don't see how I can rule vandalism on this considering that the alleged edit hadn't occurred prior to its reporting. Basically, there's no edit. Therefore, not vandalisim. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 02:10, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
The response time on this wiki just isn't what it used to be. :( --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 02:55, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
That's because edits must first be translated into Gaelic by some guy who only works from 2-4pm on a Tuesday, then sent out via carrier pigeon one letter at a time. (One letter, not letter.) --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 04:11, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

April 2024

User:Tesy

Verdict Vandal alt
Action taken Banned

The March vandal is back with a new alt, and continuing what they started last month. -- Spiderzed▋ 16:41, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

I did the thing. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 00:46, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

March 2024

User:EpicWikiGuy

Verdict Vandal alt
Action taken Banned

Vandalized the SoC's page on his third edit as a user by replacing URLs with NSFW links. Many of his edits since then appear to be boring varieties of defacement, including owned pages (and he also took a moment to create a group impersonation page), so it's clear he isn't acting in good faith. —Aichon— 19:52, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Banned. Can't seem to rollback User:DangerReport/The Harraway Building but I'll circle back on that later. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:32, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
They have undone their own edit on the Harraway Building, so there is nothing to rollback. -- Spiderzed▋ 12:45, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Huh. I guess that makes sense. Never tried to rollback multiple edits where the net difference is zero before. Wiki can't handle an edit with no changes made, so it just errors. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 15:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

User:A helpful little gn0me

Verdict Vandal alt
Action taken Banned

Obvious ban evasion alt of the one below. The bad impersonation of AHLG is just the cherry on top. I recommend to check-user and issue an IP ban, also check if there is VPN abuse involved. -- Spiderzed▋ 13:11, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Got him. We have all mysteriously lost checkuser privileges ("no such special page"). So gotta use your imagination a bit. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 15:06, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

User:Scrotum

Verdict 3EV
Action taken Permabanned

Repeatedly vandalized the pages of Fort Feral Zombies and FPDF (among others). A note on the user talk page to cease the behaviour has already been left by me, but it was ignored. Scrotum qualifies for an immediate permaban as an 3EV, as they have made more than three edits of which none was constructive. -- Spiderzed▋ 18:10, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Pretty sure this is the same guy as https://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Special:Contributions/Thetruth, based on the similarity in edit history. Seems like clear cut vandalism. -- Dislycan (talk) 18:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Could be. Anyways, banned. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 03:19, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

October 2023

User:Matahashi

Verdict Vandalism
Action taken Warned

Repeatedly and consistently blanking Soldiers of Confusedmen or removing content from the page despite multiple requests to, y'know, not mess with a group page they don't own. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 21:31, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

I never once blanked the page, only corrected false information which isnt vandalism. Specifically says on vandalism page that unwanted edits are not vandalism so long as they are in good faith. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Matahashi (talk • contribs) 17:53, 12 October 2023‎ .

I think the real issue here is that Matahashi is clearly a FckFaceMgee alt, since they took over where FckFace left off. This is not about unwanted edits, it about point of view and semantics. The Soldiers of Crossmen want to play with us, it is their intention to draw us into a friendly game of tug of war. We oblige and consider them to be friends. Whether or not they want to label us as friends or frenemies or enemies or whatever should not prevent us from expressing our point of view.ZPatriot (talk)
The fckfacemgee that got banned below me was just an imposter, only 2es in the name instead of 3 from the proper character. if this is not about unwanted edits than the case is closed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Matahashi (talk • contribs) 23:45, 12 October 2023‎.
Also hadnt bothered to check the page before answering this one, Im satisfied with what it is now if that helps you sleep at night. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Matahashi (talk • contribs) 00:30, 13 October 2023‎.
Even if you haven't blanked the page - going by character numbers, it looked like you had - you've been consistently removing/changing content on the page in a way that doesn't meet the bar of a good faith edit and attempting to assert ownership of, effectively, formatting. Continuing to edit the page after about the 5th time you were asked to stop seems like vandalism to me, thus the report. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 18:30, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

While an unwanted edit by itself doesn't equal vandalism, all vandalism is unwanted. Generally a group page is "owned" by the creator, and non-owners shouldn't be editing the page except with permission (e.g., group member) or for maintenance (e.g., updating categories); to do otherwise might be considered vandalism. I can't verify the Matahashi = FckFaceMgee claim because CheckUser doesn't seem to be working for me. Can another Sysop confirm? For the time being, please don't continue to edit the page Matahashi, as it's clearly not constructive. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 22:25, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Also not enabled for me anymore either. In either case I consider this standard vandalism. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 11:35, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
So are you goobers going to process this or what? --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 05:06, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Uh, I blame DDR. Consider this a warning. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 03:16, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

May 2023

User:FckFaceMgee

Verdict Incomplete
Action taken None Yet

Blanking the page and again. Obviously bad faith edits meant to vandalize the page. Also, considering the username, it seems to be a troll account.

Edit: Just did it again.

4th time.

5th time.

6th time.

7th time.

8th time.

9th time.

10th time.

--Please make a Free Offline Version of Urban Dead (talk) 23:07, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry this took so long. Permabanned DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 10:38, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

December 2021

User:‎Meathshield 1

Verdict Vandalism
Action taken Banned

Similar MO to the wild wild etc crazy, though used a proxy. Banned. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 14:48, 1 December 2021 (UTC)


October 2021

User:Kim Jung Undead

Verdict Vandalism
Action taken Warned

Noting that KJU's IP address is shared by two other users previously searched in the checkuser log, including User:Dragnshardz, who has been permabanned.

Either we ban KJU as a vandal alt, consider them a "main" and warn them for the Dragonshardz impersonation, or, if we believe and honour their claim that they're JISOR, we associate the vandalism with JISOR/Audioattack's account and go from there. Or we do something else. Happy to have a chat over what the other sysops think. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 02:04, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Have any of these accounts been warned or otherwise notified about using multiple accounts to vandalize / circumvent bans? --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 00:23, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Well, yes, JISOR/Audioattack has in the past, but not for this specific Dragnshardz vandalism which is what I assume you mean. Here's how it is right now: Kim Jung Undead has the same IP to 3ER account Dragnshardz, whose banning did not incur any warning for the perpetrator as we didn't know who made Dragnshardz at the time. Kim Jung Undead is claiming, on undeletions, and without hard evidence, that they are also JISOR, who is on A/VD under their original account Audioattack (UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Data#User:Audioattack). JISOR has a history of making throwaway accounts excessively so if these were all the same person I wouldn't be surprised, but there's no hard proof from the IP history.
So what we do here depends on who you think should be considered the 'main' in all this. Someone needs a warning for the original vandalism with a 3ER alt. Do we accept KJU is Audioattack without the proof and ban them all accordingly? Or do we warn KJU as the main because we don't know with certainty that they are Audioattack? That's kinda where I'm at with this. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 01:15, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
I wouldn't accept that KJU is JISOR/Audioattack without the IP link, so just warn KJU on using Dragnshardz for vandalism? --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 02:11, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
As the party affected by the attempted impersonation, warning KJU for the attempt seems just and reasonable, especially since there's no direct proof they're JISOR/Audioattack. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 07:43, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
This edit seems to back up that KJU is the same person that tried to impersonate me. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 07:44, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

I found all the old edits on the JISOR account, among others - From what I understand you can only link my to myself via IP, so regardless of how you want to warn or ban or bake a cake I will just proxy a new account and go from there :) Thanks anyhow though! Kim Jung Undead (talk) 17:11, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Hey doofuses, did you forget to do anything with this report for months? C'mon. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 07:04, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Apologies. I must have lost interest once it was apparent this wouldn't end in some sort of big brain Harvey Specter play. I have warned Kim Jung Undead for vandalism with the prior edits as the alt Dragnshardz. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION

User:Wild wild crazy

Verdict Vandalism
Action taken Warned

Vandalized The Dead. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 04:32, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

I have warned them. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 03:30, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
This is probably them again http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Special:Contributions/Wild_Wild_Wild_Crazy. Vandalized The Globetrotters. --K 16:34, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
Looked like it to me. Blocked and warned the original user. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 15:11, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Some more vandalism to the Malton Globetrotters and the Dead. I've filed this all under User:Wild Crazy as this seems to be the oldest "Wild Crazy" .--  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 18:08, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

You will never guess the contrib history of 4x Wild Crazy -- Spiderzed▋ 17:50, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Blocked accordingly. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 21:45, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
How are we not already at perma? http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Special:Contributions/Wild_Wild_Wild_Wild_Wild_Crazy --K 23:40, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Because there are no gods. No masters. Kim Jung Undead (talk) 23:44, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
It's getting there. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 00:22, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

See User:Crazy Wild, blocked. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 00:50, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Several more alt accounts have been created. Technically, we need a perma ban vote with 2/3 sysops to agree to perma ban the main account, unless the main account accrues 12 months worth of bans. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 13:05, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
Unless this was you DDR, and I need to ban you? --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 13:07, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
Eh, or the vandal got on a boat and sailed away... --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 13:09, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
I support permaban of DDR. --K 15:23, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
Lol... I probably should have explained myself there. I made the next set of expected accounts to park and idle them. Hopefully it will break the cycle of stupidity. I dunno. It's just so crazy it might work..... right? DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 21:37, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
It's just this technically makes you a vandal alt creator on five counts. So, 2 warnings, 24 hour ban, a 48 hour ban, and a week = I should ban you for 10 days. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 21:58, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
My babies did no such vandalising. They were innocent when you smote them down! DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 01:32, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Not vandalism but possible ban evasion. Wild crazy made the zerg group page. http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Special:Contributions/A_Meatshielder --K 18:31, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

It looks like the same person to me. Any other sysops want to weigh in on a perma on the main account? --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 22:16, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
Fine by me. As close to a 3-edit vandal as can be, without 100% being one. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 01:33, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
This probably him again. http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Special:Contributions/Lactose. Judging by the edit to meatshielders. --K 13:06, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
AHLG, what's your take on this? Same crap, slightly changed MO (annoying the dead by playing dumb rather than outright vandalising) and the IP addresses are very similar to the other ones from Wild Crazy yet not the same (checkuser IP logs have them if you want to look). Are you happy to lump Lactose with Wild Crazy? DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 22:38, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
The IPs have all switched around slightly between each alt. I've been banning them based on the similar behaviour, the similarities in the IPs and the fact that they all come from location "X". I would ban Lactose and move up to a third month ban on Wild Crazy (currently just on a 1 month). --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 00:30, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Do it. That triggers a perma vote anyway. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 01:17, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Done! --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 02:18, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Wow. Just....wow. If I had a nickel for every time someone got this insanely butthurt, I'd have two nickels. Which isn't a lot, but it's weird that it happened twice. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 20:04, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Add this one. Main account escalated. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 00:49, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Clayton Carmine

Verdict Not Vandalism
Action taken None

Continues to make unsubstantiated edits to User:DangerReport/Darvall Heights
If you look at the history, he even did a same day revert of Bob's changes
http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User%3ADangerReport%2FDarvall_Heights&diff=2406996&oldid=2406921
Clearly he is just being a sore loser and making bad faith edits as a poor attempt to troll.
I mean at least wait a day or two for the situation on the ground to actually change before just auto stomping reasonable intel updates. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ZPatriot (talk • contribs) 21:53, 12 October 2021.

I'm not yet demoted but going to refrain from ruling. That said, I wanted to drop in and reiterate what I've said before, which is that "the suburb danger statuses are the part of the wiki most designed to be corrected/adjusted with extreme frequency by interested users. In addition, the boundaries of what constitutes what status are vague and arguable on purpose. I doubt I'd ever accept an A/VB case based on a danger status dispute, unless it's a user clearly lying and manipulating the status in order to e.g. lure players or alter their behavior." Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 22:57, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
That is literally what's happening. Its in Clayton's interest to have the suburb look like an active combat zone to attract people there. They are not making changes based on an actual evaluation of the status on the ground, it's a knee jerk reaction to my modification. They are simply using the wiki as a combative tool, showing their preferred status. The situation on the ground in Darvall is no different then any of the other ghost suburbs. These edits are in bad faith, 100% ZPatriot (talk) 06:38, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Isn't what is happening at all so please don't put words in my mouth. Apologies for not taking your word on the state of Darvall Heights when all you had to add was "appears abandoned" as your reasonable intel update, yet we have survivors in the area and zombies sleeping in ruins around the suburb. Since this is such a sticky subject for you I'll give it a day before updating changes made to Darvall Heights Danger Report, even though the situation on the ground could change in a shorter span of time. Clayton Carmine (talk) 00:03, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
All I ask is that you take the time to evaluate the situation before making the change. There had been little to no activity in the area for a couple days and I did a scout around and everything was still trashed, no humans to be found, and most of our people had gotten board and wandered outward. I literally said "The Heights appear abandoned for the moment." in my summary. Since you didn't bother to put any comments on your changes, all we are left with is projection, so not sure how you can expect anything other then that to occur. ZPatriot (talk) 09:43, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

This is a better fit for A/A. As I can't verify what's actually happening in this suburb, I can't say if anyone is fabricating the danger level. I'd recommend providing evidence when updating the level, or relying on the external military reports as they are more neutral. Otherwise, the edit warring will go nowhere. NV. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:51, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Not Vandalism - But it's closer to vandalism than it should be. Normally we don't rule on this kind of stuff at all because it's not the sysop's job to rule on grey areas created by interpreting the danger zones, but having quickly scouted Darvall, I would say there's essentially nothing that should classify it as Very Dangerous, let alone fighting someone in an edit war to keep it that way. That is unless the suburb went from "zombie-infested and/or massive hostile zombie mobs" to "devoid of significant survivor or zombie populations" in the two days between the edit dispute and my inspection. It's possible I guess. I'm also concerned by Clayton's reverting of Bob's report that was sourced by the EMRP and should be the most neutral and technically correct status at the time.

TLDR; It's not fair to assume every one of Clayton's reverts in the past were based on a bad faith interpretations of Extremely Dangerous, especially since not all of them were to change the status to Extremely Dangerous anyway. I think that kind of history would be required to call this behaviour vandalism. But it definitely felt closer to bad-faith than the typical dispute. I think if the status isn't clear cut, your idea of waiting a little longer before changing it may be good Clayton. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 06:24, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

March 2021

User:Fistbump Jackson

Verdict Not Vandalism
Action taken None

Well I guess we're seeing how this plays out. Has redirected his talk page to a category page despite the notice provided after the discussion below. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 12:36, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Well if you want to pull the trigger, go ahead, but I won't look. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 17:49, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
I was warned against redirecting to groups and users. Not categories. Check the history. Furthermore, I asked to be pointed to a specific rule or any kind of precedent and received none. Fistbump Jackson (talk) 20:54, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
If the rule and/or precedent is “hi I’m DDR/Bob Moncrief and I rule by fiat” then cool but I’d like you to at least say that. Fistbump Jackson (talk)|
Based on the below case, most active sysops made clear their position was that any redirect of a user talk page produces an unreasonable barrier to contacting that user. Vandalism. revised, see below Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 13:16, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
well good job linking me to the discussion! i didn’t know this page, or that discussion, even existed until yesterday Fistbump Jackson (talk) 13:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Are you planning to redirect your talk page again? Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 14:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
It seems based on subsequent edits like FJ is planning not to do so again. I'm happy to revise to not vandalism with soft warning already served. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 13:59, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Easy. Concluded as Not Vandalism. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 02:50, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

User:Dragnshardz

Verdict 3eV Impersonation
Action taken Perma

Based on IP data & edits, a clear attempt at impersonating User:Dragonshardz. I've blocked the user based on IP data which indicates they are absolutely not the same user, about to revert the edits (which are all userspace & talk page messages, hence the 3eV), but would love a sysop to double-check me before I block the IP and delete the user/talk/sig pages. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 17:07, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 22:10, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Yep, all good. Deleted. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 23:12, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
As the party they were trying to affect: lmao, owned, idiot. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 23:57, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Dragonshardz

Verdict Not Vandalism
Action taken None

Has repeatedly replaced their user talk page with a redirect to a group talk page, including after being told that that is not allowed as users need to be contactable on their talk pages. Has also done so on another user's talk page after that redirect was reverted by me DDR as well.

I'm not bring Fistbump to A/VB since they only made the redirect once and Dragonshardz did so the second time, but will keep monitoring. How do people feel about me protecting the talk pages in non-redirected state while the case is carried out to prevent an unnecessary edit war? (nvm, see below) (And for reference Dragonshardz currently has two warnings from previous cases, so this would be a 24 hour ban.) Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 18:44, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Actually, nevermind on the protecting talk page issue. I'm looking back through precedent and think protecting the page would be self-defeating; I'll continue to revert the redirects, if needed, until this case is concluded. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 19:14, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Per the Specific Case Editing Guidelines, my talk page belongs solely to me, and I can do whatever the hell I damn well please on it. I logically cannot be vandalizing my own property, and the person who would be able to accuse me of "vandalizing" Fistbump's Talk page is Fistbump. Not you. There is no policy on the wiki that requires my Talk page to be "usable to contact" me, or that I cannot redirect it to another Talk page as I wish. In short, go soak your head. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 19:33, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Also, every time you revert my edit to my talk page, I get notified that I have a "new message" which is something I clearly do not want, as evidenced by the redirect existing, the change summaries, and my request to RadicalWhig to please not mess with my talk page. He's able to abide by that, why can't you? Or do you simply want to harass me with constant notifications of blank text? --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 19:43, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
To the sysop team: I'm currently collating the relevant precedent to link here. (Also making a longer version in my userspace.) I can't find anything specific about redirects, but there is widespread precedent that User Talk pages must be usable by both sysops and the general community to contact the user, and obstructions to its usability for this are not allowed. Feel free to hold on ruling til I get that together, hopefully in about an hour. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 21:18, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Ok, here it is: There has long been a guiding principle to rulings that user talk pages must be usable to contact that user by both the sysops and the userbase at large, with the sole exception of banned users, whose talk pages are protected. The user talk page is the first stop for anyone discussing edits elsewhere on the wiki. There are innumerable examples of "take this to the admin talk page or your talk page" if you go back through the A/VB and other admin archives. The user talk page is the place to have discussion, including discussion the user in question doesn't like.

A user making their talk page unusable is not allowed.[1] Doing so is vandalism if it is intentional, but not if it is an honest coding mistake.[2] This includes to the extent that others may e.g. reduce image size in order to make a user's talk pages useable.[3] Users can request that their talk page be deleted, but cannot, for example, demand their talk pages remain deleted/uncreated by other users, as they are needed as a point of contact.[4] I don't believe a user has previously attempted to use redirecting to circumvent this, but it stands in clear comparison to the prior examples. (This is excerpted from a much longer text I just collated in my userspace if you want more details.) Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 21:53, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Neither precedent or principle are policy. Redirecting my talk page to another page doesn't make my talk page unusable. It encourages people not to use it. And again, logically, it is not possible to vandalize something that belongs to you. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 22:01, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Precedent is a big part of how the wiki has operated since 2006. If you're opposed to that, I encourage you to craft a policy proposal that invalidates precedent and requires all policies to be explicit.
Redirecting your talk page significantly hinders a user's ability to edit or post on it. Also, you absolutely can vandalize your own user talk page, for example by posting something that violates TOS there.[5] Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 22:22, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Also the VERY FIRST CASE you link to in order to back up that your claim that my edits to my talk page are vandalism was ruled to not be vandalism. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 22:06, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
It was ruled not vandalism because the user fixed it before it could become vandalism. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 22:22, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Either way it still isn't vandalism for me to redirect my talk page. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 22:44, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
AND that case is about having text or other material outside the normal page area, which is not what a redirect does, so it's not even barely fucking related! --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 22:11, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
It has the same effect of hindering a user's ability to post on your talk page. If anything, making a page a redirect makes it more difficult to do so, especially for those who have less familiarity with wiki operations like the (+) button. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 22:22, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
It requires them to click a single clearly visible link to go back to the talk page. It's not that hard. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dragonshardz (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

Not Vandalism - Dragonshardz wants to do something with their talk page and clearly believes they have the right to do it. I can't in good faith have them warned/banned right away for something they don't realise they can't do. However, Bob is right, user talk pages must be reasonably accessible for the function of the wiki. That essentially overrules talk page rules or any other personal touches one wants to add to their home page.

Some relevant precedent. A user cannot have their talk page protected for periods that they are actually active on the wiki, for the specific reason that it their obligation to be contactable if they are contributing to this wonderful website. Users like Finis Valorum thus needed to request talk page protections only when declaring they were to be absent from the wiki and their talk pages would have to be unprotected once they returned. Iscariot's talk page had stupid rules in an attempt to literally forbid admins from posting on his page "or he would misconduct them". It didn't work and as I recall he never bothered testing it cause even he knew it was dumb. He removed them a year or so later.

And there's also the general "function of the wiki" precedents that come into play here. Kind of. You can't do certain things on this wiki that make the function of the wiki more difficult for general users. same goes for random crap that breaks basic wiki functions. These examples aren't directly related obviously. But they are examples of the Sysop's mandate to ensure the wiki can run smoothly, as it's intended, at the base level.

Basically, it's unfair to ban you for something you didn't know for sure that you couldn't do. But, like the predecent Bob posted above, now you do. That means if you continue with this edit war I'll vote vandalism next time. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 22:30, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Redirecting the page doesn't make it more difficult for general users to leave a message. There's a link right under the title of the page it redirects to that takes you back to my talk page without being redirected. I'm not doing anything that prevents people from editing my talk page, just encouraging them to not. It's absolutely ridiculous to state that it's possible for me to vandalize my own talk page. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 22:42, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Vandalism isn't something that can only occur on some pages and not on others. It's literally just a bad faith edit. It can be done by anyone, anywhere. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 22:57, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
A redirect on a talk page which by WIKI LAW belongs to me is a bad faith edit based on what policy, exactly? --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 23:03, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
The creation of that redirect was not vandalism. I said so above. The continuing to do so after being told it goes against the sysop's interpretation of past precedent & policy, is bad faith. Policy dictates sysops are allowed to interpret on a case-by-case basis to this degree. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 23:43, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
There is no policy that I cannot redirect my own talk page, nor is there precedent for this specific issue. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 00:03, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Exactly. So the decision is 100% up to the interpretation by the sysops as explicitly stated in the guidelines, my reasoning of which is collated in the above links and examples provided by myself and Bob. You are welcome to your interpretation and it is entirely your choice to push it as hard as you are pushing it. I expect the result of that will be that by the end of this endeavour you will have helped create the precedent you seem so interested in us producing. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 00:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
I'm only pushing it because Bob is a tedious fuck who decided that the best way to coerce me into doing what he wants is making a VB case. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 01:04, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Y'all's argument is the same as telling someone that they cannot paint the inside of their owned home a specific color, and now that they have been told this, they will go to jail if they paint the inside of their house a specific color. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 23:07, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
All I'm reading here is that you think I should have voted vandalism straight away because that fits the standards of real-life criminal justice more. This is not real life, your talk page is not your house. It's a wiki. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 23:43, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
My talk page is my talk page. Why is choosing to redirect it to a different talk page such a big fucking deal in the first place? --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 00:03, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
It's not a big deal at all. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 00:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
If it's not a big deal, why bother making a VB case about it? Eh, Bob? --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 01:04, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
I'm very thankful for this actually as it was a great way to establish a precedent. Sorry you had to be the vector for it, but thanks! Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 01:51, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
I didn't "have" to be the vector for it, you pretentious twat. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 02:35, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
The user talk page is more like the mailbox on the front of your house (which is your userpage) — you own it but legally it has to be functional to receive mail there. And I live in a city where by ordinance our mailboxes have to be one of a specific set of colors (mine is dark green). Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 01:51, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
And in this case, you're the neighborhood Karen on the HOA making a big fuss about my shade of green being oh-so-slightly off. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 02:37, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
There's no policy against being a Karen. ;) Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 14:23, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Nobody likes a Karen, Karen. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 15:20, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
I do! At worst I find them entertaining, at best a challenge to out-Karen. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 19:32, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
You find white women who call the cops on Black people for having a cookout entertaining. This explains an uncomfortable number of things about you. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 00:55, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
That's not what a Karen is, that's called a racist. Or if that's your definition of Karen then I'm definitely not, I think rules-monger is a much more accurate appellation. Also I think this conversation would at this point be better held on a user talk page rather than on A/VB, so will continue on one if you like. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 01:00, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
I'm a-ok with this. Would love at least one other sysop to agree with DDR (not vandalism but this is precedent that you cannot redirect your user talk page going forwards) before I officially withdraw the case. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 01:51, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Imagine spending hors of your free time to scroll back through 16 years worth of vandal banning data just to stick it to someone who doesn't operate their talk page in the way that you want. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 02:49, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Ehh, it was only ~13 years and ctrl+f is my friend. But that kind of scrolling is what I signed up for when I applied for sysop. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 14:23, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Bob's argument rests on whether changing Dragonshardz's talk page to a redirect makes it impossible (or at least difficult) to contact Dragonshardz directly. However, it takes a single click on (Redirected from User talk:Dragonshardz) to go back onto their page and make a comment, so it's certainly still possible to contact them; it's just mildly annoying and not difficult. Any user is allowed make edits to Dragonshardz's talk page in this manner, and Dragonshardz can revert these talk page edits if they wish. Both of these users can make these edits back and forth endlessly, and neither of the user's edits would be vandalism. If Dragonshardz doesn't want a specific user from using their talk page, they can make an A/A case. They could also try to make an A/A case to block any and all users on the wiki from using their talk page, but I don't think an arbitrator would rule in their favour and I'm not sure how such a case would work mechanistically anyways.
  • I think a stronger argument is that the redirect could prevent an inexperienced user from directly contacting Dragonshardz, but that's speculative. They may or may not notice the redirect, or understand what a redirect is.
  • It matters where the redirect goes to and what is on the page. A point in Dragonshardz's favour is that the redirect directs people to Talk:The Dead, a group of which they are a member (so far as I understand). If the page contained elements that blocked the redirect message, or linked to the main page of an unrelated group (for example), I'd change my conclusion here.
  • It's best to not assume that Dragonshardz is being deliberately disruptive. Perhaps they prefer the redirect because "I get notified that I have a "new message" which is something I clearly do not want" (Dragonshardz).
  • Not vandalism. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 15:59, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
I'm glad somebody gets it. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 17:49, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
I understand this — I disagree in that I do think the redirect click constitutes making it difficult to post on the user's talk page, but I'm cool with this ruling. Before we wrap and so I understand, if a user talk page redirected to, say, Talk:Main Page, would that be obstructive enough to count as vandalism? Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 19:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
I probably wouldn't bother ruling it as such, unless it became common for people trying to reach Drangonshardz to post on Talk:Main Page by mistake. Call it a pointless redirect, in that case Tongue :P. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 21:54, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

As DDR RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 19:42, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Closed as not vandalism, although I will be removing the redirect according to the majority of sysop feedback. Same for Fistbump Jackson. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 04:29, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Bob Moncrief

Verdict Not Vandalism
Action taken None

Has repeatedly reverted edits to my talk page despite clear indications that I do not wish for the redirect on it to be removed. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 20:16, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

My response is basically the outcome of the above vandalism case, so it should be dealt with before this one. Undoing the edits is a basic administrative action to undo vandalism (the redirect) and thus isn't vandalism. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 21:55, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Undoing my edits on my talk page is vandalism, regardless of it being a "basic administrative action to undo vandalism" - which my redirect is not. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 22:03, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
An unwanted edit to a talk page, even repeated, is not vandalism, and a redirect is not a "message" so I didn't remove anything that isn't allowed (actually required, see above) to be removed. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 01:53, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Not vandalism DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 22:31, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

At best this is a good faith attempt to revert vandalism; at worst it's an edit war. Not vandalism. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 13:59, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Not vandalism As the Gnome RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 19:45, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Closed as not vandalism. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 04:29, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Archives

Vandal Banning Archive

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
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning&oldid=2436005"