UDWiki:Administration/Misconduct

Shortcut:
A/M

This page is for the reporting of administrator (sysop) misconduct within the Urban Dead wiki. Sysops are trusted with a considerable number of powers, many of which have the capacity to be abused. In many circumstances, it is possible for a sysop to cause considerable havoc. As such, users are provided this page to report misconduct from the System Operators. For consistency and accountability, sysops also adhere to the guidelines listed here.

Guidelines for System Operator Misconduct Reporting

The charge of Administrative Misconduct is a grave charge indeed. If misconduct occurs, it is important that the rest of the sysop team be able to review the charges as necessary. Any charge of administrative misconduct must be backed up with evidence. The clearest evidence that can be provided for administrative misconduct is a clear discrepancy between the relevant action log (deletion, block, or protection log) and the archives of the relevant administration service page, and this is a minimum standard of evidence admitted in such a tribunal.

Misconduct is primarily related to specific Administrator Services, not standards of behavior. As such, situations including verbal attacks by sysops, while frowned upon, do not constitute misconduct. Sysops on a wiki are in theory supposed to have no more authority than a regular user - they merely have a greater scope of power. Personality conflicts between sysops and regular users should be treated just as a personality conflict between two regular users. If, in the course of such a conflict, a sysop abuses their administrative powers by banning a user, blocking or deleting a page without due process, that is misconduct, and should be reported to this page.

There is, however, an exception to this rule - excessive bullying, or attempts to treat the status of sysop as a badge of authority to force a sysop's wishes on the wiki may also come under misconduct. Any accusations of this should come with just as clear evidence, and for such an action to be declared misconduct, there should be a clear pattern of behavior across a considerable period of time.

All discussion of misconduct should occur on this page, not the talk page - any discussion on the talk page will be merged into this page once discovered. Once a misconduct case has been declared closed, a member of the sysop team will mete out the punishment (if deemed necessary), and then move the case to the Archive.

Administrative Abilities

For future reference, the following are sysop specific abilities (ie things that sysops can do that regular users cannot):

• Deletion (ie complete removal, as opposed to blanking) of pages (including Images and any other page-like construct on this wiki), through the delete tab on the top of any deletable construct.
• Undeletion (ie returning a page, complete with page history) of pages (including any other page-like construct on this wiki (Images are not included as deletion of an image is not undoable), through the undelete tab on the top of any undeletable construct
• Protection of pages (ie removing the ability of regular users to edit or move a particular page), through the protect tab on the top of any protectable construct.
• Moving of pages (ie changing a page complete with the page's history to a different namespace).
• Warning users reported in Vandal Banning.
• Banning of Users (ie removing the ability of a specific user to edit the wiki), through the Block User page.
• Editing of Protected pages by any means.
• Research IP activity using the CheckUser extension.
• (Bureaucrats Only) Promotion (providing the above abilities) of User to Sysop/Bureaucrat status.

If none of the above abilities were abused and the case doesn't apply for the exception mentioned above, then this is a case for UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration or UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning.

Example of Misconduct Proceedings

Sysop seems to have deleted Bad Page, but I can't find it in the Archives of either the Deletion or Speedy Deletion pages. The Logs show a deletion at 18:06, October 24th 2005 by a System Operator, but this does not seem to be backed up by a request for that deletion. I would like to know why this is the case -- Reporter 13:42, 28 Oct 2005 (BST)

The deletion was asked through my talk page. I give my Talk page as proof of this. -- Sysop 13:42, 28 Oct 2005 (BST)

You know the rules, Sysop. All deletion requests have to go through the Speedy Delete page. Next time, please inform the user where they should lodge the request. This is a clear violation, will you accept a one-day ban as punishment? -- Sysop2 13:42, 28 Oct 2005 (BST)

I'm not liking it, but I clearly broke the rules, I'll accept the ban. I'll certainly remember due process next time... Sysop 13:42, 28 Oct 2005 (BST)

As punishment for failing to follow due process, Sysop has been banned for a period of 24 hours. This will be moved to the Archive shortly. -- Sysop2 13:42, 28 Oct 2005 (BST)

Before Reporting Misconduct

Due to a the growing number of Non-Misconduct cases popping up on this page the Administration Staff has decided to compile a basic summary of what has been viewed as Not Misconduct in the past. Please read over UDWiki:Misconduct and make sure that what you are reporting is in fact misconduct before filing a report here.

Cases made to further personal disputes should never be made here, harassment of any user through administration pages may result in vandal escalations. Despite their unique status this basic protection does still apply to Sysops.

Misconduct Cases Currently Under Consideration

User:Karek

We all know what this is for. Karek overturned the democratic vote occurring on A/D regarding the Umbrella Corporation/Report page because it violated crit 6. While at first glance it would appear he is right, actually bothering to read the old request shows that isn't actually the case. The page was put up for deletion by yours truely because it seems i temporarily forgot where A/MR was and also thought some might want it deleted. The votes over the next 6 days were close to split, at which point the owner of the page cleared it of content allowing boxy to speedy the page ala crit 1. Thus we see the page was never actually deleted with its content on it. Rather the page was deleted empty, then the content was moved to another page. Anyhoo jump forward a few months and it's put up by Haliman and the community, this time voting purely on the content of the page and not the fact that it is in the wrong space are in the process of allowing the page to stay, keep votes were clearly ahead, however the voting was by no means over as it had only been up 6 days. At that point Karek deleted it and Nubis declined an undeletions request.

From this case i first want the page undeleted. Then the deletion request can continue. While i don't give a flying fuck about the page i feel that since the other umbrella have a similar page this one should be allowed. Secondly i want Karek vandal escalated. This wasn't a minor skipping of red tape. It was a major misuse of sysop powers and furthermore demonstrates the worrying trend towards certain sysops doing what they please when they don't agree with the clear will of the community.

Oh and just so everyone is aware i did request that Karek undelete the page and allow the vote to continue and stated i would use a/m if that didn't occur, so i am trying to avoid drama where possible :) --xoxo 00:32, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

You forgot the A/VB thing. That's kinda important because that's when I deleted it. --Karek^maps?! 01:32, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Ah yes, and the a/vb case that changes precisely nothing.--xoxo 01:35, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Lemmesee... some fool makes a harassment page, and when it goes for deletion he removes all content from it and the page gets speedyed under crit6. It then gets recreated and it gets deleted 6 days after being posted into deletions, AGAIN. Well, the page had a undergoing voting process that was halted by the original creators, the voting continued when they recreated the page. Since there are more delete votes (if you count both votings), i must say that i give reason to any sysop to delete as voting was more than over for this page. The users involved abused of their legal-foo skillz. Not Misconduct. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{talk mod} 01:49, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

The thing you're ignoring is that at least one of the delete votes (mine) and perhaps some of the others merely want it removed from the main space. The cases are about different pages, it is not so clear cut as content. If i had a page deleted from the mainspace i would recreate it in my userspace and depending on the content there is a good chance it would be allowed there. The 2nd deletions vote is the only one that accurately reflects the community's view of the page in its current form. Besides, if Karek is so sure the community doesn't want the page what did he have to lose but letting the voting finish?--xoxo 02:05, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Not Misconduct and the A/VB changes everything, if you were a sysop you would know this....ohhhh. Conndraka^{mod TAZM CFT} 02:00, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

All that the a/vb shows is that Wan agrees with Karek...--xoxo 02:05, 20 January 2009 (UTC)