User talk:Boxy: Difference between revisions

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
Line 16: Line 16:


==New Stuff==
==New Stuff==
== administration question ==
Hi, I was browsing around this wiki's administration policy and I was a little confused with this guideline, the one that states a user may be warned or banned 'When acting in accordance with approved policies.' What does this mean? Isn't doing this good? [[User:Liberty|Liberty]] 08:10, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
:Boxy will no doubt move this around to the right part of his page, please try and follow people's conventions on their own pages. The user in the guideline you quote is the sysop doing the warning. The sysop may warn when acting in accordance with approved policies. It's the future proof clause, it allows a sysop to warn a user even though a policy wasn't approved when the guidelines went through, it elimates the loophole of ''"You can't warn me because the guidelines don't mention or apply to that policy because it wasn't invented"''. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 08:30, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
:What Iscariot said, basically. You've got to read it in the context of the whole paragraph.
:''"System operators may only warn/ban a user... [snip]... acting in accordance with approved policies."'' <small>-- [[User:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">boxy</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">talk</span>]] • [[The Rules|teh rulz]]</sup> 10:48 3 January 2009 (BST)</small>
===Sexylegsread's banning===
===Sexylegsread's banning===
I hate to say it, but you're probably going to A/M for that one. It was a witchhunt and nothing more, a 48 hour ban is ridiculous.--{{User:The General/sig}} 18:03, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
I hate to say it, but you're probably going to A/M for that one. It was a witchhunt and nothing more, a 48 hour ban is ridiculous.--{{User:The General/sig}} 18:03, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 423: Line 430:
'''[[User talk:Boxy/Archive|General talk archive]]''':
'''[[User talk:Boxy/Archive|General talk archive]]''':
----
----
== administration question ==
Hi, I was browsing around this wiki's administration policy and I was a little confused with this guideline, the one that states a user may be warned or banned 'When acting in accordance with approved policies.' What does this mean? Isn't doing this good? [[User:Liberty|Liberty]] 08:10, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
:Boxy will no doubt move this around to the right part of his page, please try and follow people's conventions on their own pages. The user in the guideline you quote is the sysop doing the warning. The sysop may warn when acting in accordance with approved policies. It's the future proof clause, it allows a sysop to warn a user even though a policy wasn't approved when the guidelines went through, it elimates the loophole of ''"You can't warn me because the guidelines don't mention or apply to that policy because it wasn't invented"''. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 08:30, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:48, 3 January 2009

Main

TalkLocationsSuggestSignatureTemplates
NavigationPlaypen POV SugImage Archive

Stop hand.png Please read first!
Don't worry about keeping to the relevant sections, just add new subjects at the top, I'll move 'em around when I get to it.

New Stuff

administration question

Hi, I was browsing around this wiki's administration policy and I was a little confused with this guideline, the one that states a user may be warned or banned 'When acting in accordance with approved policies.' What does this mean? Isn't doing this good? Liberty 08:10, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Boxy will no doubt move this around to the right part of his page, please try and follow people's conventions on their own pages. The user in the guideline you quote is the sysop doing the warning. The sysop may warn when acting in accordance with approved policies. It's the future proof clause, it allows a sysop to warn a user even though a policy wasn't approved when the guidelines went through, it elimates the loophole of "You can't warn me because the guidelines don't mention or apply to that policy because it wasn't invented". -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 08:30, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
What Iscariot said, basically. You've got to read it in the context of the whole paragraph.
"System operators may only warn/ban a user... [snip]... acting in accordance with approved policies." -- boxy talkteh rulz 10:48 3 January 2009 (BST)

Sexylegsread's banning

I hate to say it, but you're probably going to A/M for that one. It was a witchhunt and nothing more, a 48 hour ban is ridiculous.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 18:03, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

48 hours was his next escalation level.--Karekmaps?! 19:21, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Yes, but it should never have been vandalism. Vandalism is defined as a bad-faith edit and this wasn't one.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 21:30, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
He made plenty of bad faith edits to increase the effectiveness of the impersonation's "lulz", General. On the vandal's talk page, on A/VB, and on A/M. It was a joint effort, in the planning, and the implementation... and that's only if you buy the story he tells -- boxy talkteh rulz 01:58 2 January 2009 (BST)
Yes it was, this was meatpuppetry. It was him trying to get around the rules by telling someone who he knew and wouldn't be punished to make a throw away account and do it in his stead. Sockpuppetry is vandalism, this is the same thing with an extra layer of insulation.--Karekmaps?! 21:45, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
A friend suggested it, not him. While it was very bad form to say "it will be lulz", I can't see that as vandalism. I feel we're getting a dangerously close to a vendetta here.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 21:54, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
A friend that has never edited the wiki and wouldn't know who Cyberbob is? That is/was one of the worst cope outs I've ever heard/read.--Karekmaps?! 22:02, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
lol, read, good pun :) --xoxo 23:09, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey Mr. Boxman!

If you use Fire Fox 2 do you think you could look at this revision and tell me if Engel's character box is in the middle of the page, and not after a giant stretch of space? Last time I looked at my page, it was FF2, and it looked fine. I get FF3, and all of a sudden, the character box was pushed waaaaayyy down my page, for no reason. I made some changes to fix the way it looks here, but I'm just curious now.-- dǝǝɥs ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 01:48, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Try <br clear="both" />--Karekmaps?! 12:06, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm using FF3, and it's the same. Changing the table width to 65% (instead of 95%) fixed it for me. It's because your character table is too wide for what remains of the page when you take into account the sidebar with the templates on it, I think -- boxy talkteh rulz 14:56 31 December 2008 (BST)
I know, but in FF2, which I used up until 2 days ago, I never had to change it, and it always looked fine. That's why I was wondering if it was an FF 3 thing, and I didn't want to have to down grade, check, and then upgrade again and find all my bookmarks and neat tid bits again.-- dǝǝɥs ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 15:01, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Weird eh? Dunno, can't help -- boxy talkteh rulz 15:03 31 December 2008 (BST)
Firefox 3 probably has stricter standards support then Firefox 2 so it is possible that it would cause problems on some pages.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 18:03, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
I figured as much when I first saw it, I just was wondering if anyone had FF 2 could tell me if that revision looked okay. I'm not looking so much for a fix (Karek), or an explanation as to why (Monsieur Box), but more just a quick check up should anyone use FF2 still. But thank you all anyway. I am grateful. :) -- dǝǝɥs ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 19:27, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Hilariously enough it works in IE7.--Karekmaps?! 19:30, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
It works in IE7, but not FF3? Damn you Mozilla!-- dǝǝɥs ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 19:47, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
And actually Style="clear: right;" would probably fix the problem.--Karekmaps?! 19:35, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Don't worry about it, no one uses Firefox 2 anymore. In fact, you were the last person to switch to Firefox 3. ;) --ZsL 19:42, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
I probably was, I waited to get 3 until the Red Shift theme was released for it. :D -- dǝǝɥs ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 19:49, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
You know you can disable the theme/add-on filters right?--Karekmaps?! 21:47, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that

Yeah, I added a note on the category page, and six months is a long time. Thanks for the heads up, though. Linkthewindow  Talk  08:09, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Umbrella

I disagree with you regarding redirecting the word Umbrella. There is a solid difference between Umbrella Corporation and Umbrella Biohazard Containment Service. There was never a need for this from either groups. --Thadeous Oakley 13:17, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

There may be, but two groups in the city have "Umbrella" in their name, and in the interest of imparality, one should not be favored by using a redirect. Linkthewindow  Talk  13:22, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
There is the issue that the Umbrella Corporation was around far longer then the UBCS, they should have considered another name back then.--Thadeous Oakley 13:25, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
The page is now protected in the form of the disputed edit (i.e Boxy's). Take it to arbitration and don't start edit wars over something as simple as a redirect. Thank you. -- Cheese 13:35, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
If there is a edit war then it should be sorted out with arbitration, in the meantime the page stays in the original form until the ruling. Misusing sysops powers is not what you do. Unprotect the page return to the original form and then take this to arbitration.--Thadeous Oakley 13:37, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Actually, it's not misuse. Quoting the Guidelines "In the event of protection, a system operator is expected to protect the page in whatever state the page was in at the time the request is reviewed, regardless of its original state."-- dǝǝɥs ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 15:34, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
That's not point. If I were to "edit" a page because I disagree with the content I would be told to go to arbitration. I go there, and during the arb case which version of that page would be kept up? The original one or the one with my vandalizing edits? Good answer: the original one. I have experienced myself that this goes this way. Now I am asking for the same treatment of this redirect page, is that odd?--Thadeous Oakley 16:10, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Its only one way because of precedent. It could just as easily be the other, any time a sysops wanted to do it another. You also have to remember the whole "Personal Judgment" clause.-- dǝǝɥs ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 16:13, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
The arbitration reversion clause only applies if you have an active and open arbitration case. You don't. You haven't started one. The page in question is protected due to an edit war, therefore the prevailing precedence is the Protections Guidelines that state the page will be protected in its current state when the protections request is reviewed. There is no abuse of sysop powers here. Go start an arbitration case disputing Boxy's edit, until that case resolves you can have the page reverted. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 16:27, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Alright, so according to Suicidalangel it depends on the personal choice of the sysops and according to Iscariot it depends whether the page falls under the protection or arbitration precedence? Uhm okay, since Iscariot's tale seems more logical I will go along with that. I am gonna wait for Boxy's response for now.--Thadeous Oakley 17:31, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
And of course, you interpret it wrong. It depends on BOTH. If a sysop feels it's in the communities best interest to do something differently than the guidelines or precedent state, then he can. If he doesn't, he follows the well established precedents and guidelines.-- dǝǝɥs ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 18:29, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
The reason that I decided to make a disambiguation page is that there is at least one person out there who is using the similarity of the names to cause confusion as to whose forum is being linked to. And the similarity of the logos and page looks are also confusing. It needs to be clear that the groups can easily be confused. If I have it right, one of these groups split off from the original to form a splinter group? -- boxy talkteh rulz 23:29 29 December 2008 (BST)
Close. They had an arby case a few months ago over this. It's quite stupid and it's all here if you want to read it over. Basically Haliman took up an open offer from Airheadoh to take over UBCS. Haliman and Umbrella had a big falling out in the past over something and they (Umbrella) didn't like this. So they pretty much made it difficult as hell for him to take over (and he was making it difficult for them to stop him taking over). At the end of the case we had two UBCS groups and this is just the aftershocks of that since the 6 week no speaky condition ran out a few weeks ago. -- Cheese 00:07, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Sheesh. So... was Umbrella Corporation originally the "mother group" to UBSC (and other umbrella sub-groups), and since Haliman took over, USBC split off altogether and now they've become enemies? -- boxy talkteh rulz 00:14 30 December 2008 (BST)
Pretty much yeah. -- Cheese 00:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
I can make this allot more complicated: Again, the original Umbrella is the Umbrella Corporation. It's not my fault he (haliman) chose to create a similar like group. Secondly, there isn't just an Umbrella and a UBCS. You have the Umbrella Corporation and there are the different UBCS's. You have the Umbrella Biohazard Countermeasure Service, the U.B.C.S._Merc-for-hire and finally the youngest and haliman's one, the Umbrella Biohazard Containment Service. That's three group's alone who all use the UBCS acronym and begin with "Umbrella". We never had any issues with them about the "Umbrella Redirect" page not even with haliman's one (though I am sure he wants to keep it now). Why wont we add them all to the disambig page while were busy. Oh and disambig of the word "UBCS" needs to be enlarged aswell. Oh, and do outdated and inactive groups count to? Cuz then we need to drag this one in too: Umbrella Special Operations Unit. Nothing bad intended or anything Boxy, but your opening Pandora's Box. On a another note, you should know that in the Resident evil/biohazard universe Umbrella is the big evil pharmaceutical corporation and the Umbrella Biohazard Countermeasure Service is Umbrella's own PMC. When using the word Umbrella one usually means the first while for the latter almost always the acronym UBCS is used. Hope this clears things up, probably not though. --Thadeous Oakley 00:56, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
OK, thanks. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has been ignoring this whole multiple Umbrella orginisations confusion thing for a while now because it was all just too much hard work to figure out. The latest spate of vandalism has meant that something needs to be done to sort this out, and make it clear what pages belong to what organisation, and I feel that a disambiguation page is the best way to do this, and yes, I was going to expand on what I had put there, listing all your sub groups under your heading, but it's been locked now. What do you think about making the Umbrella page more than in addition to being a disambiguation page? Somewhere that explains the relevant Resident Evil history, as well as the history of the Umbrella/UBCS groups in Urban Dead -- boxy talkteh rulz 01:06 30 December 2008 (BST)
Well I have gone ahead and expanded the disambig of UBCS. Uhm, you can't just unlock "Umbrella" and add the rest then in the meantime? I am pretty sure you are a system operator. Or do we need to go through some sort of "unlocking process" first? As for your plan of expanding "Umbrella" in a page that explains the different presences of Umbrella and its relations in Malton, well that's a very nice idea :). However, with all the hostility ;{ its probably hard to make it NPOV in a way everyone can agree with.--Thadeous Oakley 12:46, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
You can request edits at A/PT. Linkthewindow  Talk  12:49, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
I could edit the page, but it would be against the rules. I've got to go through A/PT like everyone else. I suggest you pick someone impartial to you both, agree to let them decide what goes on the page, and then open up a discussion in neutral territory, like arbitration -- boxy talkteh rulz 12:51 30 December 2008 (BST)
I am pretty sure I have dispute with you over that page, Boxy. Look, either we revert the page to its original state or we add all the other groups I named aswell. Atleast, that's what needs to...arh. --Thadeous Oakley 12:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
I don't care who you pick, just someone that has no vested interest. I might even put my 2c in as well, because the confusion makes the sysops job harder. It needs to be extremely clear who owns what page, so that the vandalism that has been going on lately can be easily spotted and evaluated -- boxy talkteh rulz 13:03 30 December 2008 (BST)
Your losing me. I dont wanna look stupid on you but this is confusing .There's only one person which I have a dispute with about the "word" Umbrella and that's you. If your meaning this guy here:User:Haliman111 , well he is not involved atleast not with this. If I go A/PT and request that the other groups are added to the disambig of "Umbrella", will that be okay?--Thadeous Oakley 13:11, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Sure. If you agree not to revert it to a redirect, I'll ask for it to be unprotected, and it can be expanded upon -- boxy talkteh rulz 00:59 31 December 2008 (BST)
I agree not to revert it back to a redirect and I am for expanding the current disambig.--Thadeous Oakley 11:45, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Can I have a private chat about the vandalism, Boxy? I have a few questions... They can be on my forum, or anywhere private, just not here with all of the.... Eyes.
Forums: http://z10.invisionfree.com/Umbrella_UBCS/index.php?act=idx --Haliman - Talk 20:21, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Oh the secrecy, lol...That would be a NPOV chat, right?--Thadeous Oakley 23:12, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
You can email me by using the link attached to this page if you must -- boxy talkteh rulz 02:03 2 January 2009 (BST)

UBCS Merc-for-hire

Hi, Boxy. Look, I'm in charge of the UBCS Merc-for-hire, and I noticed you changed the page name to Umbrella Corporation/U.B.C.S. Merc-for-hire... This is inacurate. We are contracted by Umbrella corporation, and I am a full-time member of their group, but the UBCS Merc-for-hire is a sovereign entity, predating the Corporation by about a year in UD alone. Though I appreciate the link to our page in the UBCS redirect page, could you please undo all the changes you've made to my group's page. Thank you, Leon Cane 14:38, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

You're giving mixed messages here... you say you're a full time member of the corporation, the group is "contracted" by the corporation, yet somehow you're saying it isn't a sub-group? That would seem to be the definition of what a sub-group is -- boxy talkteh rulz 00:58 31 December 2008 (BST)
Well... We're not. I, personally, am I member of Umbrella, which does not reflect my group, who are not. My group is, however, under contract to Umbrella because we are mercenaries, and they have the highest bid. If you'd take a look at our "Who We Are" section, there's a good bit of information that suggests that we are not, in fact, a sub-group. At any point, I can simply terminate our contract and my team moves on; we in no way are dependent on Umbrella, nor they to us. We belong to no-one. But listen, what it comes down to is this: It is my group. You have posted fallacious information on its page, and I request that your remove it. Thank you, Leon Cane 02:08, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Is this one of those alt abuse things, where you're in the parent group, and also in the daughter group with another alt, trying to make out they're separate entities? Regardless, your roleplay explanation doesn't convince me. You could try to convince another sysop on A/MR, I guess -- boxy talkteh rulz 15:25 31 December 2008 (BST)
Now you're just being petty. WV is a member of DORIS and the Philosophe Knights, are you saying he's alt abusing? Or that the Knights are a sub group of DORIS, or vice versa? You going to refuse to move the PK back into their own namespace if someone pushes through a move to associate them under DORIS? -- Iscariot 17:28, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
No. I was genuinely asking a question, Iscariot. I wasn't sure if he was talking about two characters, one in UBSCmercs and one in UCorp. The whole set up sounds like the DEM or Extinction, and I see their having alts in multiple, closely allied groups as alt abusing. (BTW, I put your sig in for you, hope you don't mind) -- boxy talkteh rulz 01:22 1 January 2009 (BST)
No. The UBCS is not a subgroup. They are our closest allies. The fact that Leon Cane works at both groups is a cause of our good relationship not the reason. There is no zerging, there is only one Leon Cane out there, and he has UBCS Mercs in his grouptag and yes he is active on both group forums. Now unless that is forbidden by wiki regulations I really don't see a reason why UBCS Mercs must be categorized as subgroup against there own will.--Thadeous Oakley 12:01, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
OK, I moved it back. It's all seems a bit incestuous though :p -- boxy talkteh rulz 12:47 1 January 2009 (BST)
We are a very complicated group, both in structure and relationship :P.--Thadeous Oakley 13:26, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Page

Aren't there any rules for things like these?--Thadeous Oakley 11:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and they include taking it to arbitration so that you can present evidence before changing another groups sub-pages -- boxy talkteh rulz 11:53 29 December 2008 (BST)

IRC

If you can please get on, I think we needs to talk about something sooner rather than later.--Karekmaps?! 08:52, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't use IRC much at all. Want to email me (the email via the wiki is activated) the one we're using these days (last one I know of was the nexuswar one) -- boxy talkteh rulz 09:00 28 December 2008 (BST)
Sent, I really dislike the way emails are handled though. And it's still the nexuswar one that grim set up a while ago.--Karekmaps?! 09:12, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Next time either of you are on could you ask Revenant to unban me? --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 09:32, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
hahahaha.--xoxo 01:36, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Laugh it up faggot, IRC is small potatoes next to the shitstorm you've brought upon yourself. Enjoy your impending demotion. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 02:13, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Move request redirects

Don't think they're scheduled but by their very nature they should really be deleted once all old links are cleared, unless of course there are trillions of them. I'm too lazy to actually check scheduleds so i could be wrong. Just wondering what the generally accepted approach is?--xoxo 12:05, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

If you move a page, you can (scheduled) delete the redirect that gets automatically created in it's place, as long as there are no links to the redirect page (other than from admin pages like A/MR and A/SD) -- boxy talkteh rulz 13:36 25 December 2008 (BST)
If someone else moves and decides (slash is too lazy ) to move it and i wander in and want it gone?--xoxo 13:37, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Use your judgment. If it seems obvious that there could be no legitimate reason to leave the redirect... fix the links and bin it. Don't just do it as a matter of course -- boxy talkteh rulz 16:29 25 December 2008 (BST)

Policy

Since we're already in the middle of one case over edit wars, it might be easier to resolve this here. You'll notice, if you actually read the top of the talk page, that The General makes note of the policy being under discussion under the same title and being archive by mistake. This is why it was entered for voting early. Now, one of you is breaching policy, either him for entering the policy early and attempting to subvert the voting process, or you for removing valid votes on a policy under voting.

Which is it? -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 04:52, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

If the policy was actually as good as it should be, I'd probably say that putting it straight to a vote was within the spirit of the policy, but given the fact that there's at least one very confusing grammatical problem with it, meh, "a coupla days...'" -- boxy talkteh rulz 05:00 24 December 2008 (BST)
Is meh your official response as a sysop? The policy concerning suggesting and entering policies for voting is clear, it has the qualifier should. The General's explanation on the talk page is one that I'd view as sufficient for this qualifier to take effect. In which case you have incorrectly removed votes from a policy under voting, therefore I'd like a more definitive answer than meh. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 05:20, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
If he wants to take me to A/VB, he can, and I'll even put my hands up and take a warning for it, for messing with his policy. But I feel that it was an edit in good faith to improve his policy, and it's chances. Go annoy him about reporting me if you want. I don't mind -- boxy talkteh rulz 05:25 24 December 2008 (BST)

individual page creation?

Ok, I was editing that one :P.--Lithedarkangel 23:40, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Heh, sorry. Don't you just hate that! I've made a post on the locations nuts page about it anyway -- boxy talkteh rulz 23:41 22 December 2008 (BST)
So far, Hollomstown and Shearbank are free of merged pages.--Lithedarkangel 23:45, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Mall Status

You've updated Treweeke Mall's status. What, status updates aren't coming quick enough for yeh? Gotta take matters into your own hands? :D Met Fan 00:59, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Just happened to be there when it fell -- boxy talkteh rulz 01:35 22 December 2008 (BST)

RE: Arbitration

Since I am apparently acceptable to both of you, the case St. Iscariot vs. Boxy has been opened. --WanYao 06:42, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I've started a (hopefully) brief cross-examination phase. After Iscariot reponds to my question, I'm permitting you a brief rebuttal to the question. There may or may not be a few more questions... Thanks. --WanYao 19:32, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Waiting on Iscariot's concluding statement to the Arby, followed by yours. Thank you. --WanYao 07:21, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Is this step even really necessary? I'd think you'd have enough information to at the very least be inclined to rule one way or the other at this point. There's a A/PT request waiting on the outcome.--Karekmaps?! 07:23, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Our lovely discussion has been archived...

Moved from Nubis's page

Is there more to this discussion? It shouldn't be lost to the archive.

quite frankly i'd be glad if you thought nick and jed were the same account. I mean it's so apparent we aren't. If you suspected us i'd be all like "lol what a douche he thinks we're the same person" coz like, who the fuck could be bothered acting like different people for 2 yearss??? that shits stupid....xoxo 05:07, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  1. 03:46, December 17, 2008 J3D got IPs for Nallan on ud_wiki
  2. 03:45, December 17, 2008 J3D got IPs for J3D on ud_wiki
  3. 03:45, December 17, 2008 J3D got IPs for Boxy on ud_wiki
  4. 07:01, November 23, 2008 J3D got IPs for J3D on ud_wiki (added)
Interesting. Did boxy give you permission to check his IP? Was he vandalizing or suspected of account sharing/sock puppets? Why would you need to get IP information on yourself and Nallan? --– Nubis NWO 23:08, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Just a sneaking suspicion i had about those 3...--xoxo 23:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Trying to find out where I live again, eh J3D? I hope you're not planning on sharing the big info with your buds -- boxy talkteh rulz 00:44 18 December 2008 (BST)
I wish i was that internet capable...--xoxo 04:20, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
If you already checked his you'd know that they probably already checked it themselves with his sysop privileges.--Karekmaps?! 10:03, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Proof plz. I'm the only person who knows the password to this account.--xoxo 00:55, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Check User from the 14th lends itself to a different conclusion.--Karekmaps?! 01:22, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I didn't check that one. Interesting. So the J3D account and the Nallan account are used from the same computer at times. I see two options of what went on on December 17;
  1. either Nallan logged in as J3D and used the sysop tools to look up the IP details listed above and make inane posts on multiple admin pages;
  2. or J3D looked up the IP details above, and noticing that Nallan was showing up as using the same IP he went about making damned sure that I checked it out in the hope of creating a dramafest by checking my IP details, and making posts on A/PT and signing as Nallan.
I'm inclined to go for option 2, because he even went to the trouble of IP checking a non existent user, presumably refering to this post of Nallans] which looks very much like something a friend would do if they managed to log in to the accoun ("I'm feeling niggardly LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL (nigger)"). Worst case senario, other kids have access to J3Ds account, best case, J3D is using his checkuser abilities to stir up drama because he's bored with it already -- boxy talkteh rulz 07:21 19 December 2008 (BST)
This seems like something Kevan would be interested in. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 07:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
WOW!! You guys have really fucking overactive imaginations! I couldn't think up such a tale of intrique if you paid me! Anyway as well as being astounded i should probably offer up an option number 3. Nallan and I are real life friends, you should all be aware of this, we don't hide it. As real life friends we visit each other at home (each other's IP addresses) and thus on occasion edit from one anothers IPs. I'm fairly certain this is well within the bounds of the guidelines. Now you sure fucking don't have to believe me, but i don't really care either way, this is simply if you're interested - No one edits off my account except me. I can't guarentee you no one edits off Nallan's account except him but i sure haven't. Anyway that is pretty much the story. I love it how the option with the most simple explanation is the one you all fail on.--xoxo 04:03, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
lol this shit made my day. Kevan must be alerted! fucking gold.--Nallan (Talk) 04:52, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
You do realise that that explaination is basically the same as option 2, except it neglects to explain why you felt it neccessary to look up my IP details, the IP details of a non existent user and act like a prat on multiple admin pages -- boxy talkteh rulz 22:39 20 December 2008 (BST)
"noticing that Nallan was showing up as using the same IP he went about making damned sure that I checked it out in the hope of creating a dramafest by checking my IP details" How is that even remotely like what happened??? --xoxo 14:30, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

The above moved from Nubis' talk page -- boxy talkteh rulz 10:10 28 December 2008 (BST)

Continued discussion

I'll guess you'll never find out the answer ;) --xoxo 03:44, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Unless it shows up here... --xoxo 14:31, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
So you want to continue the drama, but strangely you move the discussion, and your reply to me to someone else's talk page. Good work, chum, way to show me that you didn't do it all for the excitement -- boxy talkteh rulz 01:39 22 December 2008 (BST)
Yeah, coz i totally moved it :|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:| L2history. --xoxo 02:26, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
OK, sorry. It was Nubis who brought it back out. You still haven't explained your random IP checks though -- boxy talkteh rulz 04:51 22 December 2008 (BST)
We were drunk, it seemed funny.--xoxo 04:52, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Fark, are you trying to get demoted, or something? Found out just how not-fun sysoping is, eh -- boxy talkteh rulz 04:54 22 December 2008 (BST)
The only sysop function i did was IPing you and the guidelines state suspicion is enough to warrant doing so. So there really isn't anything demotion worthy happening there.--xoxo 05:33, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
So what made you suspicious of me? Oh, and User:Nigggers!, who doesn't even exist, but was "suspicious" to you too. What makes it possibly demotion worthy is that it seems you were looking up someone's personal information with your mates for a lark -- boxy talkteh rulz 07:02 22 December 2008 (BST)
We were drunk! Niggggers was for lulz, to see what happened when you IPed a non-existant user. Also, my IP info has been looked up repeatedly by the admin, i have never used any other account besides this one on the wiki and never allowed anyone else access to mine. Yet on 5 separate occasions sysops have decided it was necessary to look up my details, surely that's overkill? Like i said, it was for fun, nothing bad happened with your IP info and quite frankly my internet skills don't extend as far as being able to turn an IP address into anything useful.--xoxo 07:25, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
But you did give the other sysops reason to be suspicious by signing as Nallan and all of a sudden changing your posting style on admin pages. The fact that you think it's acceptable to get drunk with your mates and go looking up people's IP addresses goes towards your trustworthiness to have access to such information -- boxy talkteh rulz 07:30 22 December 2008 (BST)
Your idea of an awesome time while drunk with your mates involves a computer? Wow, you're pretty cool. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 05:02, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
I am cool, 2 Cool ;) (wink means it's funny lol) --xoxo 05:33, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Hey bob - who exactly do we have to impress here? I play a MMORPG based around a zombie apocalypse - gave up on being cool loooong ago.--Nallan (Talk) 05:37, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Never too late to come back to the light brosef - give up on the game and do more for shits and giggles. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 05:42, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

VB incompetence

Schultz.png "I noze nussing!"
Boxy truly believes that Schultz noze nussing!

No really, we really and truly do!

You and your mates are at it again, eh. Keep off the admin pages (except for A/DM) unless you're going to do the job you fucking signed up for -- boxy talkteh rulz 10:08 28 December 2008 (BST)

Journals

I wanted to ask, shouldn't this and other pages be on their writer's supspace? --Janus talk 22:55, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I've just noticed the redirect. Thanks. --Janus talk 22:56, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Oh man, the Malton Chronicles contains a heap of pages in need of moving and re-linking... later -- boxy talkteh rulz 23:10 11 December 2008 (BST)
Mmh, about 20 pages. Should I list them on the Move Requests Page? --Janus talk 23:19, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
If you want to :) I've got to go now -- boxy talkteh rulz 23:20 11 December 2008 (BST)
Ok. :) --Janus talk 23:21, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

This user has more than 10 pages that should be moved in his subspace. Is writing all those links in the Move Requests page useful? --Janus talk 15:41, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, Nubis moved them. --Janus talk 18:28, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
Seems everyone has forgotten about the Journal psuedo-namespace that has been the convention since forevers and evers. Shame really, as it contains the biggest page on the wiki.--Karekmaps?! 02:42, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I know it's there... I just don't see the point in putting journals there (as opposed to user sub pages), because it is only a pseudo-namespace, basically just an ordinary page. At least as a user sub-page, we can tell who the journal belongs to, regardless of what character name is attributed to it -- boxy talkteh rulz 12:13 13 December 2008 (BST)

grats on promotion

I look forward to your nervous breakdown and the subsequent power trip that will get you desysopped, a proud UDbureaucrat tradition. Prost! --ZaruthustraMod 03:33, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

yep... it's just a matter of time, they'll get you too. You know it too be true. -- Vista  T  16:01, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
I was planning on just slowly loosing interest, and fading away, but if that's not the done thing... any suggestions on an original wig out plan? ;) -- boxy talkteh rulz 12:15 13 December 2008 (BST)

several things

firstly, fuck you. You are unfit to be a crat. But then again, maybe you're not too bad. I still haven't made up my mind. Before i forget i also need to discuss this with you. Look at it. It's technically a subpage of some fucked up spelling shit, but it's not. He just misused the /, whats the deal with that? Also, boxy, i don't mind y ou. You're alright. You can be a cunt. And you sure are no grim. But still you're fun to fuck around with on this wiki of ours. Anyway since i'm writing this i should probably endorse 2 Cool and suggest you vote on ALiM. Do it now. cya round buddy. Also, do you live in sydney? coz that shit would be lolarious...--xoxo 17:11, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Normally we'd use % url encoding but it apparently doesn't work with slashes on the wiki. So nothing.--Karekmaps?! 18:03, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
You could move it to Suggestion:20081206 Pistol Appearnce-Type, or something, if it's bugging you. If you do, fix up the links to it, and get rid of the redirect. p.s. this page is a bit underused, atm, you should contribute :p -- boxy talkteh rulz 00:26 8 December 2008 (BST)
dun.--xoxo 00:46, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Here's your keys back

I think we should get a policy going to make you a permanent 'crat. =p I think this is your 4 term now unless my adding is hopelessly screwed. Congratulations. =) -- Cheese 22:18, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Only meatpuppets would be allowed to vote though :P -- boxy talkteh rulz 05:49 5 December 2008 (BST)
All is going well. Have you implanted the device with the user rights change as ordered, Cheese? --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 22:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes, Master Gnome. It has been done. I await further instruction. -- Cheese 22:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
No further commands, underling. Just remember to "activate" it on the 10th. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 22:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes, my Master. It shall be done as you have commanded. -- Cheese 23:45, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Bot

Does not compute. MC Grammar 15:30, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I just called to say i love you

And I mean it from the bottom of my heart.--xoxo 12:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

So much love on the wiki at the moment, it's getting to me...--xoxo 12:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Sysop thing.

Yep. And it will be. Its only there so I can have fun with the move button today. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 08:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Usually...

...the a/sd template accompanies a listing on a/sd.--xoxo 12:51, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

It's supposed to... but I get sick of telling people. Why? -- boxy talkteh rulz 13:20 24 November 2008 (BST)
You put the template on something without putting it up on a/sd, i forget what now..--xoxo 04:37, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Wow finding that was easy...--xoxo 06:17, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Ahhh. Yeah, that's why I put the template on it, so I could find it easy. I didn't want to delete it right away, to give the author a chance to figure out what happened. I'll schedule delete it sometime (if one of the other sysops doesn't get it first -- boxy talkteh rulz 10:35 25 November 2008 (BST)

Soldier UDW

11/21/08: Dude! Stop moving our pages! How do you like it if one of your pages gets moved? We are keeping an eye on you. If you moved one of are pages again we will track you down and POW! Ask permission next time if you are going to move one of are pages. Or else we would prosecute you for Insubordination. I don't even care if you are an Arbitrator, just stop moving are pages and ask next time if you are going to do.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Soldier (talkcontribs) 03:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC).

Group sub pages go in your group space, where I put it. Now you stop recreating the page in the wrong place, or you're the one going to get done for "insubordination". If you want to have exclusive control of what can and can not be said on the page, and especially the talk page, it must be in your group sub page area, otherwise it's a community page, and anyone can edit it and removing others comments off the talk page is considered vandalism -- boxy talkteh rulz 05:31 22 November 2008 (BST)
Might help if you explained how he could use it as a template outside of that namespace for the sake of the Recruitment pages.--Karekmaps?! 05:56, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Looks like he understands that already -- boxy talkteh rulz 08:44 22 November 2008 (BST)
Quick Question; how do you charge somebody higher ranking then you with insubordination?--Jakezing 15:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Because Darkmagick/Powerhouse, when you're making pages on a WIKI, the Sysops technically have a higher rank in the disciplinary hierarchy than a normal user does. Shut up and get out noaw.-- dǝǝɥs ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 15:34, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Why do you have to be so mean you Bastard; What did I ever do to you? I was asking how the idiot here (soldier) could call Insubordination on Boxy if BOXY outranks him? Learn to read child; it helps quite alot.--Jakezing 15:42, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm mean because normally when I converse with you, you end up annoying the piss out of me. Now, with the way your question is set up, it looks as if you're asking Boxy instead of Soldier. Learn proper formatting. Indent to the person you're talking to, not the people you aren't talking to.
That is funny though, asking me to lrn2read, as you still can't even use the English language properly (I.E. proper capitalization).-- dǝǝɥs ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 15:54, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
This conversation is the funniest thing I've read all week. =p -- Cheese 16:09, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Indenting to a older message is quite a hassle though and on wikipedia it is... Frowned apon because it adds random indent into the conversation and supercedes older posts.--Jakezing 18:07, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm actually laughing at Soldier and his misguided ideas that he is actually in the right here. =p It makes me chuckle. And his grasp of basic English grammar is brilliant. That also makes it 10 times more funny. -- Cheese 22:37, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Cute, now hows about someone actually try to sort out his problem instead of patronizing him.--Karekmaps?! 02:33, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
You could get off your ass and do it yourself to you know. You can't blame us when your just as lazy.--Jakezing 04:47, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
I did, and I shouldn't have had to when two other sysops were already an active part in this discussion. As for you, well, I'm thinking SA had you right earlier here, if you can't do something useful just go away.--Karekmaps?! 06:25, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
I am sorry but I need veryfiable proof that I was being useless :D.--Jakezing 12:47, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, proof would be that you still haven't tried to fix anything wrong here.
Also
01:49, December 6, 2007 (hist) (diff) User:Darkmagic (Redirecting to User:Jakezing) (top)
01:48, December 6, 2007 (hist) (diff) Cody6 (Redirecting to User:Jakezing) (top)
I stand by my earlier statement. Go away powerhouse/Cody6/Darkmagic.-- dǝǝɥs ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 13:23, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Just read back -- boxy talkteh rulz 12:54 23 November 2008 (BST)


Oh, and by the way Monsieur cübe, I am deeply (not really) sorry for hijacking your page. :) -- dǝǝɥs ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 13:34, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Rule breaker *looks disdainly at you* :D--Jakezing 20:10, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

wow; what happend

to grim?--Jakezing 04:14, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

He got sick of our putting up with our obvious inferiority -- boxy talkteh rulz 09:01 21 November 2008 (BST)
I always miss the fun.--Jakezing 11:53, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

I guess this is whee im supposed to put it..... Well much thanks for the name help, it took me hell trying to git it right :) -- Yungblood 7:40, November 20 2008 (EST)

np. Read through the help pages for editing tips -- boxy talkteh rulz 09:03 21 November 2008 (BST)

Spoilsport

:(--Honestmistake 12:10, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Ja, I know :) -- boxy talkteh rulz 12:15 20 November 2008 (BST)

Crat election

I think you forgot to add J3D to the list... Like it or not he is a Sysop and unless i missed something that means he is eligible to stand. --Honestmistake 11:39, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

How could I forget ;) (easily... by going off the outdated, undeletions activity check list!). Thanks -- boxy talkteh rulz 11:42 20 November 2008 (BST)
Glad to help before you got a place on the ModConspiracy boards ;) --Honestmistake 11:44, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Permabanned users

So it seems that members of the team are open to reviewing previous vandal banning cases in order to bring them up to date with this policy. Does this work for you? --Akule Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™ 19:41, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

link

P.S Why you/any sysops never use irc? Grim used to, haggy and karek do from time to time but that's it. It would be handy...and i'd promise to avoid berating you as much as possible.--xoxo 01:23, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

P.P.S If you lurk under some other guise can i haz?--xoxo 01:24, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Gnome can't figure out IRC anymore... --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:26, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Gnome should use mibbit, it's uber easy. Unless gnome can't figure it out coz gnome doesn't want to figure it out? :P Also can a/pm haz archive?--xoxo 01:28, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm too easily distracted to irc regularly -- boxy talkteh rulz 01:35 2 November 2008 (BST)

A/D

Regarding your vote on several user redirect pages i have separated the case into individual cases, if you feel so inclined please recast your vote on each page relevant to how you feel about that particular redirect being kept on the wiki. Sorry for any inconvenience this may cause.--xoxo 07:47, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Gah, why must you do this? If it doesn't change things it doesnt matter. Every user who voted has been informed on their talk page, they'll notice. Secondly, you're wrong, not every user voted for all pages concerned. Thirdly, why were they grouped together in the first place? When they were first moved across by a sysop they should have been split up, sorry i only just got onto that. Fourthly, different votes are valid for different entries, people shouldn't be expected to vote on all of them, it'd be like me putting up lol made up page and user:boxy and not letting people vote on them separately. While my action is not backed by any specific policy these cases must be considered separately and to ensure justice is served for them (and everyone has time to recast their votes) the 2 weeks can reset if you'd prefer.

I don't plan on reverting because edit wars are pointless however please do not ignore this, we can discuss here, irc or wherever.--xoxo 08:09, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

It changes thing by making a shitload of people (at least one of which says he wont be around for a couple of week) re-cast their votes, even if they don't want to change them. All the delete vote made it clear that they didn't want any of them kept, yet you removed the lot, because voting wasn't going your way. Moar drama, or w00t? -- boxy talkteh rulz 08:13 26 October 2008 (BST)
I've made it pretty clear why i separated them, they should have been seperated from the start. Unfortunately those people voted on the lot, unaware they could be considered separately. I did the next best thing and told them all personally, this doesn't have to be more drama and i think my informing of all concerned parties speaks fairly clearing i wasn't looking for more drama with this. Why said they wouldn't be around for several weeks? --xoxo 08:16, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
If you want to split them up, then all current votes should be placed under each page, and let people know that they can change them for individual pages if they want. Oh, and make the headers different this time -- boxy talkteh rulz 08:22 26 October 2008 (BST)
Fine.--xoxo 08:26, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

"every delete vote was for all pages concerned". Prove it. Read's wasn't.--Nallan (Talk) 08:08, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Reads was a keep vote -- boxy talkteh rulz 08:13 26 October 2008 (BST)
Gah, you're right. Sorry.--Nallan (Talk) 08:38, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

You forgot one

Kevan. --xoxo 01:36, 25 October 2008 (BST)

That page has long been considered a special exception.--Karekmaps?! 01:37, 25 October 2008 (BST)
twas said in jest! But yeah i think Kevan should be it's own page with information for people about who Kevan is. It's important people know and his userpage doesn't really make that clear.--xoxo 01:40, 25 October 2008 (BST)

Hm...

this looks kinda bad-faith-ey in the sense that it's almost impersonating an actual official message. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 14:30, 24 October 2008 (BST)

You know where a/vb is, whats the matter? need a sysop to hold your hand?--xoxo 00:12, 25 October 2008 (BST)
"Kinda bad-faith-ey... almost impersonating"? lol. Anyone who can read will immediately see that it's not official.--Nallan (Talk) 00:55, 25 October 2008 (BST)
Possibly to avoid actual punishment for a stupid joke. Not much like Cyberbob but it's a very possible result, so quitcherbitchin'. :P--Karekmaps?! 00:57, 25 October 2008 (BST)

Quick question

What timezone are you in? Just curious as to why you're the only sysop on (or are the others just staying away from a/vb for now).--Nallan (Talk) 10:13, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Also I think I might be due for a ban struck. Is this correct? It seems ages since my last vandal case.--Nallan (Talk) 10:17, 24 October 2008 (BST)
I'm Australian, and one escalation has been struck -- boxy talkteh rulz 12:15 24 October 2008 (BST)
Danke.--Nallan (Talk) 12:17, 24 October 2008 (BST)

A/VD

Plz to be striking my escalation? It's been well over a month and I've made 250 edits since then. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:51, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Done -- boxy talkteh rulz 12:15 24 October 2008 (BST)

My escalation

I can tell you this, I guarantee you I have no idea how to deal with images, it was the first time I have uploaded an image that wasn't already resized for me by someone else.--CyberRead240 08:49, 24 October 2008 (BST)

A/D

Can you please protect it for the short term. CB shows no desire to let the pages be moved there as policy dictates.--xoxo 08:24, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Yes, please do. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:25, 24 October 2008 (BST)

How about every one of you pricks stops edit conflicting me, now. And I'll try to sort through your fucking crap -- boxy talkteh rulz 08:26 24 October 2008 (BST)

Fire away. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:27, 24 October 2008 (BST)
lol, you sure like licking boxyanus--CyberRead240 08:28, 24 October 2008 (BST)
A good way to prevent edit conflicts is an hour long ban of the feuding parties (if they don't stop after being told), it gives them time to cool down, and time for you to sort through the mess. Well thats my 2c. - Jedaz - 08:29/24/10/2008
Oh so tempting :) -- boxy talkteh rulz 08:35 24 October 2008 (BST)
thats fucking insightful...--CyberRead240 08:30, 24 October 2008 (BST)
Right, because that worked out so well for the last guy that tried it. Do you remember? Also, I believe the edit warring is over. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:32, 24 October 2008 (BST)
I can't remember that, links please? (looks like the edit warring has just moved pages) - Jedaz - 08:59/24/10/2008
YOUR 2C!?!?!??!! Sorry, but i fucking couldn't resist.... --xoxo 08:33, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Your comments on the Gamestriker4 case

I just wanted to say that I feel that was a bit out of line. Regardless of your own personal opinions, your position should not be compromised by what you think of one user and his associates. This is no way coming on here to pick a fight, just dropping you a line in hope that you re-read over what you have written and realize that the Vandal banning page is no place for a SysOp to sledge a user like that. Personal opinions are fine, and I could see why you would have them against Jed, but the whole "aLiM nAzI" thing is just not on really.

That case had nothing to do with personal ownership of the page, he never claimed that, and as a Sysop you should not immediately jump to those conclusions. You are more or less showing that every case that Jed is involved in, you are going to reduce it to some slanging match over the way they treat pages that they created. Your position requires you to be objective, and you could not even do that when it came to a simple vandal case.

Whether or not ALiM or its offspring are your cup of tea is irrelevant, as it means something to some users of this Wiki and you should respect that.


Please, don't take this as some sort of attack, just re-read it and consider what your actually saying next time. It is just that the more I read it, the more I feel as if it is a little out of line, that's all.--CyberRead240 13:49, 23 October 2008 (BST)

lol butthurt --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 13:53, 23 October 2008 (BST)
cool story bro--CyberRead240 13:57, 23 October 2008 (BST)
i know bra --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 14:16, 23 October 2008 (BST)

User contributions

As I peruse the wiki, I often read the A/VB page to just see who's causing mischief. I noted that the person known as Woot has been posting nonsense on that page. So, after taking a look at his or her contributions lately, they are almost exclusively gibberish posted to various talk pages in an obvious effort to be a troll.

Is there a policy that applies to that sort of nonsense? I wasn't able to find one. In general I think a bad faith case probably applies to trolls.

your thoughts? --Stephen Colbert DFA 20:04, 21 October 2008 (BST)

Insanity is his thing... but generally he is a helpful member of the community, if given a chance, for example, this edit. Trolling would need to be a whole lot more blatant than WOOT's contributions, which seem to be more playful than anything. But no, there is no trolling policy, and it would be extremely hard to write one, given the totally subjective nature of "what is trolling?" -- boxy talkteh rulz 08:07 22 October 2008 (BST)
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS TROLLING!!!--xoxo 08:42, 22 October 2008 (BST)
Also; There is no Cabal.--Karekmaps?! 21:04, 22 October 2008 (BST)
I heartily concur.--xoxo 06:22, 23 October 2008 (BST)

Great Fire ambiguity

Hey as one of the wikizens around here that has a background with ALiM projects that goes back before the purge, we'd greatly appreciate if you went here and testified. We are asking for witnesses who can confirm the fact that the page, Great Fire of 1912 was indeed created by and largely moderated by myself and User:J3D. The task of claiming our creation over the page is complicated by the fact that no history is available to back up our claim due to the history purge. Thanks for you time.--Nallan (Talk) 08:12, 11 October 2008 (BST)

Colloquialisms

It is neutral tone, the nav bar really recognises the people who have put effort into making the page and linking to other relevant projects that might interest readers. cbf repeating, see cyberbobs talk.--xoxo 03:27, 11 October 2008 (BST)

  1. The nav bar is ugly and intrusive,
  2. The nav bar is bloody ugly and intrusive, and doesn't fit the overall style of general community pages,
  3. If you want to make a guide, and put it in the guide namespace, please try to make it look professional,
  4. I'm getting real sick of the constant spam and cross-promoting being done by the 2 Cool crew to get page hits up on their "quality projects".
Just because your group helped make those pages, doesn't mean that you should be allowed to spam adverts to your group page, and other, often totally unrelated, pages you created -- boxy talki 05:58 11 October 2008 (BST)
It's a guide for colloquialisms, by it's very nature it is going to be somewhat unprofessional hence stuff like the picture and the text adds to the character of the page. I think the ALiMnav template is quite beautiful, it got a tad out of hand with the add for the ALiM party but since that is removed it's back to it's old beautiful self. We are thinking of redesigning it to make it more streamlined (wider and not so tall) but yeah, that won't be until november or so. --xoxo 06:08, 11 October 2008 (BST)
You think that a nav bar that is baby shit yellow, over half a page wide, and 11 lines high isn't out of hand at the moment? Please? Your nav bar screams "look at me, look at me!". It's a bloody advert -- boxy talki 06:21 11 October 2008 (BST)
Would a soft, sky blue suffice?--Nallan (Talk) 06:24, 11 October 2008 (BST)
A 1x1x1 one should look good -- boxy talki 06:26 11 October 2008 (BST)
I think that may be a little impractical...--Nallan (Talk) 06:27, 11 October 2008 (BST)
We did have a community discussion about the implementation of the navbar, shame you are opposed to democratic process or you could have joined us...--xoxo 06:29, 11 October 2008 (BST)

hum... the 2 cool navbar is sooo awesome :D i think i am going to copy it and add it to all pages i helped create and improve... lemmesee... the Suburb page, the suburb template, Arbitration, Policy Discussion, the building danger reports, the main page... all these and many others will advertise me, so everybody knows how awesome i am :D --People's Commissar Hagnat talk 13:57, 13 October 2008 (BST)

lolz -- boxy talkteh rulz 14:07 13 October 2008 (BST)
We already know hagnat, and they have to be pages you (or your group) singled handedly sculpted from nothingness fyi, or else it's not really 2C, ya dig? Feel free to borrow our awesome navbar for any purpose though.--xoxo 00:29, 14 October 2008 (BST)
Willfully ignoring his point, by pretending to take his sarcasm at face value, doesn't change the fact that what you are doing with these pages you create is extremely petty. Demanding to be acknowledged, in such an obnoxious way, as the creator is pathetic. Look at the MIC, Hagnat created that from scratch. The closest thing that I see to your garish navbar is a single category linking to Category:Style Up!.
MIC = Classy
ALiM = Obnoxious -- boxy talkteh rulz 11:17 14 October 2008 (BST)
There is one key difference here you are willfully ignoring, ALiM etc pages are fictional lulz, MIC etc are informative pages and are not the place for links to other stuff you've created. Unless of course the other stuff you've created is somehow relevant, in which case go for it! What we do is more comparable to groups listing their allies in a section of their page.--xoxo 11:29, 14 October 2008 (BST)
What? Caiger Mall isn't just as fictional as the great fire? :P
If you want to claim your pages as fictional, non-informative pages, then perhaps you should keep them totally separate from the "factual" side of the wiki, and not implant links to them into suburb, locations and other informative pages?
And no, I don't expect you to do that, I just expect you to concede that there is no clear "fictional" "factual" divide, and that you are placing many of those pages into the community section of the wiki, regardless of the clearly humourous intent in a lot of them.
The colloquialisms page (the topic under discussion, lolz) is clearly meant to be mostly an informative page, explaining abbreviations, btw. Extremely petty to remove it from the main namespace, and place it in your own private area simply to control it's styling so that you can keep your advertising banner on it.
Perhaps I'll edit the redirect so that it has all the content, without obnoxious banner and group ownership problems? Good idea, wat? -- boxy talkteh rulz 11:42 14 October 2008 (BST)
and waste kevan's precious server space?? I think not...--xoxo 11:55, 14 October 2008 (BST)
if pages created by ALiM are fictional and owned by 2 Cool, then this template shouldn't have been added to all locations, as its merely advertising your group. There was a similar issue months ago with Dunell Hills Police Dept. overcategorization of buildings, and it was shot dead by The Dead (lol) and with the support of many sysops (myself included). ALiM should either turn into public domain, with a nice and unobtrusive template on its pages, or have all advertise of the group removed from building, suburb and other public domain pages. --People's Commissar Hagnat talk 14:14, 14 October 2008 (BST)

Location Editing

Locations talk archive:


Suggestions

Suggestion talk archive:


Moderation

Moderation talk archive


Editing teh Wiki

Editing talk archive:


General Talk

General talk archive: