User talk:Boxy: Difference between revisions

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(Radio Edit)
Line 1,297: Line 1,297:
== Radio Edit ==
== Radio Edit ==


The Mad Craskers have had 26.07 as their dedicated frequency for five years. As such, they get to share it with the suburbs or the suburbs have to move.
The Mad Craskers have had 26.07 as their dedicated frequency for five years. As such, they get to share it with the suburbs or the suburbs have to move.--[[User:Justinbronze|Justinbronze]] 03:56, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:56, 19 February 2010

Main

Talk • Locations • Suggest • Signature • Templates
Navigation • Playpen POV Sug • Image 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

Feb 2010

:(

I done it again didn't I. Strength is just an accident arising from the weakness of others 02:12, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Shit happens ;) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 09:50 14 February 2010 (BST)

Jan 2010

SA

I guess it's about time we gave loopy the keys to the door again? -- 00:54, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Oh, hey, DDR was telling the truth. You did have a post here already. :/ -- ¯\(°_o)/¯ 00:14, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
You... You thought I was lying? :*( -- 00:44, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
;) -- ¯\(°_o)/¯ 18:50, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

YOU SON OF A BITCH

"(na, can't work out how to sign, then ya don't know enough to vote)" THIS IS THE REASON PEOPLE KEEP CALLING IT A VOTE YOU STUPID JERK.-- ¯\(°_o)/¯ 05:08, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

nonexistant A/VD records

in cases like this where the warning/ban gets overturned via sysops voting not vandalism, do we just strike the warning on A/VD or do we just remove it completely? You've done these before, and I haven't, so I'm not in the loop. -- 05:36, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Strike or wipe, makes little difference really. Striking is probably what most have done in the past (not that it comes up often) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 08:29 6 January 2010 (BST)

Amending "Crit 7 by Proxy" scheduled deletion

Unanimously (with the exception of Sexualharrison's joke vote) passed on A/D/S. Considering the nature of this proposal, would it be okay to write it directly into the current Crit. 7 by proxy deletion, or should it just be entered as a new scheduling?--~ Red Hawk One Talk | space for lease 01:36, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

The title is "Amendment"... obviously they voted for the amendment to the original rule. -- 02:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Alrighty then. I'll tack it onto the origional.--~ Red Hawk One Talk | space for lease 02:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Just make a note - "Amendeded 5 Jan. 2009" Linkthewindow  Talk  05:33, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Dec 2009

Potential Troll

Just a heads up that we've had a character called GasCandle swing by the DHPD forums asking for membership - you can find his user page here: User:GasCandle. He seemed to be trying to tempt us into letting him join by presenting himself as a Neo-nazi. I notice he's now a "Crazy f*cking n*gger" and has created a wiki template for himself as such. He talked to some of our more level-headed members in our chat room who were of the opinion he was a troll and an unpleasant one at that. I realise that there's not a lot you can necessarily do (and thankfully he seems to have lost interest in us), but this is a warning to be on the look out. Louise 16:56, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Holy shit boxy panic theres someone on the wiki saying fuck and nigger! To the a/vb mobile! xoxo 02:02, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

dhpd

Hey! Could you swing by the DHPD forum at your earliest convenience? Thanks!-- BULLDOGC6 07:02, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Mr. Snuffleupagus

A vampire snuffleupagus, that is! {opens mouth wide with fangs showing, eyes turn red} RARRRGGHH! --Vampire Snuffleupagus 03:26, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

注意

私達の投票を取除くことを止めなさい Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 03:22, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

What evah -- boxy talk • teh rulz 05:26 19 December 2009 (BST)

VD

Hate to sound like Iscariot, but doesn't Mister Game only have 1 unstriked warning? Surely he shouldn't be escalated to the ban yet, or is there another reason?--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 20:55, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

When it comes to arbitrartion: Not [abiding by the ruling] will be considered Vandalism, and such vandalism attempts will be treated as if the vandal has already received two warnings. So, since he already had a 24 and 48-hour ban on record, he was escalated straight to a week ban. —Aichon— 21:45, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
I assumed that was the case. Just wanted to check regardless. Thanks!--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 21:46, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

A/D/S

You bring a somewhat valid point. I'll resubmit the idea with the inclusion exeption. Should I amend the current request, let it run to term, or pull it and put the new version up right now?--~ Red Hawk One Talk | space for lease 00:33, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

You'll have to withdraw it, and start again. I suggest that it doesn't include templates or images that are in use elsewhere, and makes it clear that it has to be wiped by the only significant contributor, rather than just the original author -- boxy talk • teh rulz 05:35 16 December 2009 (BST)
DDR brings up a valid point as well about the fact that this already happens with Crit 7 via proxy and Speedy Deletions. I'm starting to think that a change to Crit 7 might be in order to prevent it from removing templates, but I suspect I'm missing something obvious. —Aichon— 01:01, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
The obvious thing to me is that with speedydeletions, there is a sysop involved. They don't have to delete templates just because they've been requested under crit 7, and should check for inclusions -- boxy talk • teh rulz 05:33 16 December 2009 (BST)


Box my man, I'm making things easier on you though. Not harder, as you can still infer it as a no. lrn2engleeshplz. ;) -- ¯\(°_o)/¯ 01:26, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks a lot. It only takes one smart arse, and then every idiot and their dog think it's kewl. English, or GTFO -- boxy talk • teh rulz 23:54 17 December 2009 (BST)

MSN

Since boxxxy gets uncomfortable if you ask him if he has MSN I'll just post here!
hi sexbawks.-- ¯\(°_o)/¯ 00:10, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes I've got MSN, no, I don't use it much :p
I yanked my modem out, and by the time I got back, I was hoping you were getting some much needed sleep -- boxy talk • teh rulz 07:41 15 December 2009 (BST)
Ha, as if. :/ -- ¯\(°_o)/¯ 12:32, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Xotels bug?

I was trying to demerge the hotels just now, but ran into a strange problem. I was demerging a motel, and tried categorizing it as a hotel (Category:Motels has a message saying to move all the entries to Category:Hotels). That is where I hit a problem; nothing on that page would remove the motel category. I eventually traced it back to Template:Info Xotel, which automatically categorizes the page into hotels or motels through a series of variables.

This is where it gets weird. I removed the variable that automatically categorizes pages, and checked out the motel category. All the pages were still there. After a refresh, two disappeared; another refresh made five disappear, and so on. The category seemed to be slowly dropping the entries around one per second. I undid my edit, and they started being re-added at the same rate.

How would you go around removing the category? And more importantly, do you have any idea what is up with the slow-motion uncategoization?--~ Red Hawk One Talk | space for lease 02:57, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Because there are so many locations pages, it's always slow for template inclusions to update. If you want to put all the motels in the hotels category, you should be able to just take out the variable in <includeonly>[[Category:{{{2}}}otels]]</includeonly>, replacing it with H for hotel -- boxy talk • teh rulz 09:18 14 December 2009 (BST)

Rakuen

Look, I understand that he's the most prolific user that's ever graced UDWiki, but I just don't feel safe giving him the buttons. He'll just do all the work and make all of us look bad. I hope you and the community understands my incredibly bold decision not to support his promotion. -- 01:06, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
LOL, no -- boxy talk • teh rulz 09:10 10 December 2009 (BST)
If you do not promote this wonderful man I will be bringing you to misconduct my good sir. That is a promise!-- SA 11:57, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
The thought of you sending me to misconduct for this reminds me of Iscariot. What reminds me of him even more so, the likelihood that you actually won't. -- 02:16, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
I will, I've just been busy and tired. Give me a day or two. Okay honey?-- ¯\(°_o)/¯ 13:04, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
LERN TO TKAE A JOKE Cyberbob  Talk  13:09, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
...You...you serious? the whole comment was a crack at Izzy, sheesh.... -- 15:39, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
LERN TO TKAE A JOKE Cyberbob  Talk  16:54, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
:/ admitting one is wrong hurts sometimes.... -- 03:06, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
dude now you're just making yourself look worse and worse... the secret to this one is I was myself joking Cyberbob  Talk  07:45, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
You honestly call something like that a joke? You and jed would actually get along very well IRL -- 08:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Since when was sarcastic caps and spelling mistakes not a joke that you get? Cyberbob  Talk  09:09, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
So how about that getting engaged of youse twoo?--Umbrella-White.pngThadeous OakleyUmbrella-White.png 10:59, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Here's hoping we both stop this argument and just turn on you now, for being such an annoying, bottom-feeding, retard faggot. -- 00:08, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Subpage

I was seeing what would happen if the slash was the wrong way round, because usually you use a backslash "\" rather than a forwardslash "/". --RahrahCome join the #party!09:34, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

As you can see, it doesn't make a subpage, it makes a "nonexistent user" page. It needs to be deleted -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:32 5 December 2009 (BST)

Hyperbig

I'll take care of the template, in a way you'll enjoy too!-- SA 23:17, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

As long as it, or other similar templates, are not used to stuff up pages, I'll enjoy it -- boxy talk • teh rulz 12:05 4 December 2009 (BST)

2 December 2009

Locationblock

Template:Locationblock
Remember a while back when I totally destroyed everything? I've been mulling over why that even happened since the location_type and location_color should always be the same. It's just occurred to me that it might be the case. The location colors are usually either "Street" and "street" will both resolve to Template:Street in the end. Both the location_type becomes "Info_Street" which isn't the same as "Info_street" and thus breakage. I figure using {{ucfirst:{{{location_color}}}}} would fix it, just wanted a second opinion before I break the wiki for the 4th time. -- User:The Rooster RoosterDragon User talk:The Rooster 15:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah, is that what was happening. Perhaps a redirect from Info_street to Info_Street would do as good a job? -- boxy talk • teh rulz 22:47 3 December 2009 (BST)
Did you take your grammar pill this morning? Anyway, the call to ucfirst is way less effort than redirects for every info template. (I was referring to said templates in general, streets was merely an example). -- User:The Rooster RoosterDragon User talk:The Rooster 23:21, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Ah, just lacking wood this morning. I'll take your word for it on the template call thing. It'll be easy enough to undo anyway, just as long as you wait for the wiki to catch up this time, before checking the results :) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 00:31 4 December 2009 (BST)
Boxy can't get it up? Gawd man keep your problems off the wiki!-- SA 00:38, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Opps, slip of the tongue... I meant would :p -- boxy talk • teh rulz 12:05 4 December 2009 (BST)

Misanthropy

What do you think? I don't mind letting this one in. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 22:33, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Worth a try -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:32 3 December 2009 (BST)
Alrighty. Been a while since we let a guy like this get through the net, looking forward to seeing how he turns out in the long run. In the meantime, I've processed his bid as successful. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 10:41, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for doing the grunt work ;) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:44 3 December 2009 (BST)
Np =D I don't mind being the fist. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 10:52, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
The fist into the anus of the wiki?-- SA 12:06, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

This is weird

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Category:Suggestion&action=edit - The only link to a non-existent category, is a non-existent page... What now? --Haliman - Talk 17:26, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Category:Suggestion_10_February_2007&action=edit - And here. --Haliman - Talk 17:28, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Two points to someone who can dig up the link that (I think) Ross gave when I asked this a month ago... --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 04:14, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Yonnua Koponen

Early by BST, but it's 29th by Aus time. What are you thinking with Yonnua? Basically, as I guess I've said in the last couple of months, I don't really dig. Sloppy with conflicts/drama etc. You? --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 13:15, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Wants it too badly without an obvious need, and doesn't have much of an idea of dealing with conflict effectively -- boxy talk • teh rulz 13:33 28 November 2009 (BST)
Alright. Processed. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 04:23, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Category:Confirmed groups

What's the protocal for removing the tag from protected groups? Do we file a request on A/PT, or just make a note of it in retrospect?--~ Red Hawk One Talk | space for lease 07:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't think there's a need to make note of them all on a/pt, as long as you make it clear in your edit summary why it is being made -- boxy talk • teh rulz 07:15 23 November 2009 (BST)

15 Nov 09

you are active ont he wiki

and not striking me despite being fully aware that i am due a striking, if you make another edit without striking me i will report you to misconduct as per this precedent. xoxo 09:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh good. Looks forward to that -- boxy talk • teh rulz 09:08 15 November 2009 (BST)

Hey box, wasn't Grim only banned for 6 months? Why is it still showing up as infinite? His ban should have been up by now, whether he wants to come back or not.-- SA 19:11, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Requested. The misconduct case of him trying to do what he did gave him six months as a show punishment but Grim had already banned himself permanently before that case started. As a self requested ban for personal reasons, it stands. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 19:16, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Oh, that's right. He banned himself first. Forgot about that. Thanks.-- SA 19:21, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
dumb. And stop re-using unrelated headers. Asshole. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 22:24, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
It's not unrelated here, and you can get over it.-- SA 23:22, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Circle no.png J3D
Don't post here.
xoxo 09:40, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I startedthis header so it belongsto meeeeeeeexoxo 09:40, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

But it says you can't post, dumarse. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 09:44, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
You idiot -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:27 22 November 2009 (BST)
How did that threat to misconduct me work out for you, BTW? -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:29 22 November 2009 (BST)
Just great! Turns out your friends got to vote on it and then vote on me :( I don like it here anymore :( xoxo 06:31, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
But aren't we fwends? --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 06:35, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
I don't think i've ever been so lost for a witty reposté. xoxo 06:39, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

also:

I'm REALLY tired, but isn't J3D still 3 edits away from reaching 250 edits since his last infraction? Special:Contributions/J3D --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 10:00, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Nubis made me do it!
Meh. He had plenty of edits from that day on the second page. Perhaps he'll misconduct me over it :) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:18 14 November 2009 (BST)
You stole mah misconduct! Bastard -- boxy talk • teh rulz 14:35 14 November 2009 (BST)

And where does all this leave me in relation to getting a striking? xoxo 09:04, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Keep posting, numbnuts, you'll get there soon ;) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 09:06 15 November 2009 (BST)

Well, 243 edits = Misconduct. So, I would think that 247 = Minor Misconduct. I say go for it! --Globetrotters Icon.png #99 DCC 15:14, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Nice! --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 22:25, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Red Hawk One

Whatcha thinking? I actually like this one, although I'm a little worried by the lack of community support he received in the bid. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 09:34, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes. I don't rate the "you dont need the buttons to contribute" though, and the "needs moar drama" isn't very realistic. We don't really need more people getting involved in drama for the sake of getting noticed. Now that there are reevaluations we can probably be a little freer to trial users if they've shown good judgment otherwise. I'm marginally in favour of promotion, given is good, judgment, work and understanding of the wiki, however the number of against is a worry -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:16 14 November 2009 (BST)
The thing that bugs me is that he has been doing plenty of legitimate and impressive work for so long, as long as I can remember him being around, and I don't think he deserves to be thrown into the dust with a come back in a month message- I agree with what you've said and I think sysops with no ego, no drama aspirations and a good gnome attitude should be promoted. I think I'd be willing to take any wrap for promoting this kid. So what say you? Yay or nay? --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 11:05, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm going with a "for promotion" -- boxy talk • teh rulz 14:34 14 November 2009 (BST)

Strike time

I am hearby requesting a striking of a ban from my vandal record as i have reached the requirements as per policy. I will be placing this request on an assortment of your peers talk pages so as to insure that this time, my striking isn't mysteriously postponed so as to further tarnish my record despite no wrong doing on my part. xoxo 08:45, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Rorybob

What are your thoughts on Rorybob? I have no issues in promoting users like Rory who only show an interest in maintaining the wiki and aren't prone to waltzing into drama they can't handle. I'd normally be suggesting we hop onto IRC for more conveniant chats, but I'm upgrading to W7 so bleugh. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 00:13, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I've got no problem with promoting people who arn't overly involved in the drama areas of the wiki, especially since users have been discouraged from contributing there unless absolutely necessary. However, I do think a few more months of experience would be good. Even in his claimed area of expertise, deletions pages, he has recently made mis-placements (SD on deletions, for eg). This suggests that he doesn't have a full understanding of the system just yet. He is obviously willing to help, and learn, so I wouldn't be surprised if he was promoted with full community support by the end of the year -- boxy talk • teh rulz 08:43 12 November 2009 (BST)
I support this. Shall I?--DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 08:45, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Sure -- boxy talk • teh rulz 08:49 12 November 2009 (BST)
Unless this is such an ego-shattering rejectiont hat he leaves and never comes back. :c -- SA 15:15, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Admin is not the place for a fragile ego, so good either way :p -- boxy talk • teh rulz 01:34 13 November 2009 (BST)
Yeah ditto. If he quits now he'll prove our point. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 02:44, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Well, it wasn't really a point I was originally trying to make, but yeah... ummmm, anyway... hope he doesn't quit -- boxy talk • teh rulz 13:05 13 November 2009 (BST)
Ah boxy we all know this is about keeping your little sysop clique together and not letting outsiders in, don't kid yourself otherwise, fucker. xoxo 08:26, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Rosslessness III

I'm practically ready to promote Ross on sight tomorrow, any issues you'd like to discuss? --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 06:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Should I take that as a no? =D Basically, promote at will my friend, I have no qualms with Ross' promotion. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 12:05, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Promote him quick, and put the demotions page up for deletion -- boxy talk • teh rulz 23:13 9 November 2009 (BST)
HA! No! 2 weeks is more than enough for him to do his dastardly deed! --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 23:18, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh.. Forgot wiki time is early. promoted him half an hour before 2 weeks. Bleugh W/E. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 23:24, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I should bring a misconduct case against you.-- SA 23:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Do it, so I can make a quick ruling, demote him... and RULE teh wiki -- boxy talk • teh rulz 23:31 9 November 2009 (BST)
lol i dono how make misconderct cases. can u tech me-- SA 23:35, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Level 3 header with sysops name there, then a big angry butthurt rant below. That's what I did anyway when it came to Nubis --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 00:00, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Seriously? Where's my "rosslessness has been promoted" news story? Such slackness. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 08:54, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Slackness that you are soon to fix up, yeah? You're our saviour to the sysop team! --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 09:07, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I swear by Odin's raven I will never again ask for demotion --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 11:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

You better fucking not. >:| -- SA 14:45, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
The only one allowed to vow in Odin's name is Ron Burgundy. Are you Ron Burgundy ? --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 16:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
No. But I Love Carpet. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 19:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
I am Ron Burgundy!-- SA 20:50, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

The DHPD and Conndraka

Hi boxy. A public statement from the DHPD around Conndraka's recent actions on the wiki, as per http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/UDWiki:Administration/Protections/2009/October#The_DHPD_know_how_to_use_headers... has been posted to our section of the wiki at http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Dunell_Hills_Police_Department/Policies_and_Procedures#DHPD_Stances

Given that you were involved in the original discussion, can you please advise if we should be posting this to any other sections of the wiki and/or letting anyone else know about our decision? It'd be great if you could reply to my talk page. Cheers. -- Sanpedro 23:18, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Cheers - I was wondering if you would mind calling past our forum so that I we can confirm this? I also have an unrelated question that I would like to ask out of the public eye 1 Sanpedro 00:04, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

I signed up as "boxy". Anyone who wants to contact me privately can click on the email user link on my page -- boxy talk • teh rulz 01:13 24 November 2009 (BST)
Cheers - have PM'd you there Sanpedro 22:49, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Your first pinata

**
Man no good deed goes unpunished. I was just wandering through and found the building empty with doors open ... so I barricade up and ran out of APs. I should have just jumped to a safehouse asap as I was in a hot zone but nooooooo I thought I was alright to stick around a little; next thing I know, I was hamburger meat. No grudge though, I was being a dumbass and paid for it ... got a revive the next day anyways so no big deal. See you around. --OO Willie 07:31, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Wiki Questions#Template parameters

Answered. If there's anything you're unsure about, I would gladly explain. --RahrahCome join the #party!21:07, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Good to know your 11 month old and already solved question is now finally answered, eh Boxy? :) Pay more careful attention to timestamps, Rory! -- User:The Rooster RoosterDragon User talk:The Rooster 23:11, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Nope. I probably should've Crit 7'd it a long time ago. --RahrahCome join the #party!11:38, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Is that a crit 7 request? Cause I can get rid of it now, if it is -- boxy talk • teh rulz 22:08 31 October 2009 (BST)

De-escalation

Alright, the template doesn't work with your TOC, so I'll just tell you. You're due a de-escalation on A/VD. Enjoy! --Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 23:49, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

While on the topic of De-escalations, this very thing got me talking to Iscariot, and I talked to him about why he wants the edit to his data reverted. The way he's thinking seems to be that it would be best to have it how it was before, instead of how it is now, because both are wrong. (Apparently, I don't know enough about the situation to tell). Would it be that much trouble for the edit to be changed back to how it was before, at least until the data is made how it should be? --Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 00:30, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
If he had ever made any effort at all to explain why it's wrong, I'd have considered it... but meh. He's had ample chance to make a case, he'll just have to put up with it the way it is now -- boxy talk • teh rulz 06:46 28 October 2009 (BST)
Oh please. Actually read Talk:A/VD and understand that we've asked plenty of times for him to actually tell us what the problem is and he's refused to look us in the eye and say it. Even read the conversation you had with him on his talk page yesterday- Surely as a sysop-in-training you were perceptive enough to see him so transparently dodge your request to have it explained. Everybody loves to fight the unjust, but even the most irritable of complainers don't know what the hell Iscariot is on about when it comes to his vandal data on this occasion. When he explains himself, we will kindly oblige. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 06:54, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Please note that Boxy has never has to explain why his version is correct, apparently the same logic doesn't apply. You'll also notice the pettiness of going out of his way and further forging my A/VD history even when I've repeatedly stated the only change I want effecting is a complete reversion of his dishonesty. He's a hypocrite. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 12:21, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I will not "please note" any such thing as he cited the history of A/VD and the results and happenings of several archived relevant misconduct cases, which, with nothing else to use as a basis, is the best we've got. I don't agree with him destriking you like he did yesterday, but whatever. It doesn't change the little squabble at hand. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 13:18, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
He did all this? For review first given the difficult circumstances? Or did he just make the changes he decided he liked and then stone walled the discussion and refused to listen further? I can bring you his exact quote to this effect if you'd like. No he did certain things to make it look like a valid edit, but it isn't, the edit isn't even consistent in itself with what it did, hence fraud. Also, saying you disagree is great and all, still doesn't mean you'll actually do something does it? Given that you don't do stuff you said you'd do either, I shouldn't be surprised. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 15:42, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
And given you don't explain things when asked, you shouldn't expect any different. The offer is always there. I only hope one day you take it. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 01:24, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
I've already told you where to look, I know I have to put banned user templates everywhere, but do I really have to do every one of your jobs for you, or you actually going to do it yourself for once? I'm not asking for my data to be wiped as compensation for various fuck ups, I only want it putting back before he started to forge it. Given it can only damaged me, the one who is requesting it, how is this an unreasonable request? -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 01:54, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Because the entire fucking A/VD system is designed to do damage to people, you fucking prick. That's what it's there for, and your escalations have been put on there and Boxy has fixed them up so it is at leased at its correct form and you have 6 fucking days of ban time up your sleeve. That's the best we can fucking do about it so shut the fuck up and relish in it rather than be a nuisance. Do our jobs. Pfft. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 02:00, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Cleverly avoiding answering the question there, given that Boxy's edits are wrong, how is it unreasonable for them to be reverted to allow the correct ones to be investigated? -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:05, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
And your avoiding of the issue at hand isn't as clever; They aren't wrong. At leased, until you can actually manage to try and prove otherwise. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 02:08, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
You mean "At least".... "They aren't wrong"? Really? Willing to stake your status as a sysop on this definitive statement you've made? Didn't think so. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:19, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Of course I fucking am willing to. My sysop status means nothing to me if I can have justice done, and if staking it on a "bet" to get you to fucking own up and tell us what the problem is with your A/VD, of course I'd put it on the line. Granted, what you have to claim must be correct. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 02:22, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
So if I can demonstrate that the current record is incorrect you'll demote yourself? I'll be wanting an arbitration ruling to back that up that includes a provision against seeking or accepting promotion within six months first. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:28, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
I can't believe it had to come to this, but sigh. Just hurry up and tell us what is up already. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 02:34, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
You've said you'd do something before and didn't do it, I'll be waiting for my cast-iron arbitration ruling to enforce your side first. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:37, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
You touch that arbitration page and the deal goes dead. The entire point of me putting this "badge" on the line is because I want this done quickly and efficiently, the way it should have happened a month ago. I'm trying to fucking help you out here to at leased try and have what is "right" (by your opinion) done. If you think you can drag this out into a massive circus fest with extraneous bullshit, I'm walking out of here. And don't even try and say it is because I am scared. Just show me this stupid evidence and see how it flies. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 02:39, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm not going to start the case, you are. You've said to me before that you'd do something and then not done it. Unless there's something to prevent you from just deciding not to uphold your side. It doesn't need a circus, you and I can act as dual arbitrators (there's nothing against an arbitrator being an involved party) and we'd have an agreement drawn up on a case page in 24 hours, given a week (Halloween is approaching) and I'll present a nice full page proof, you can alter A/VD and then go demote yourself. It'll be my easiest sysop kill ever. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:46, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
As pitiful as it is, they aren't my terms. You just tell us, like a normal person would, what the "problem" is. That's as simple as it needs to be. Then A/DM we go. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 02:49, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
No, they're my terms. My terms stand, otherwise there's nothing to prevent you just deciding not to go through with the agreement, or bouncing back up two weeks later. Accept them, or does that badge mean more to you than you've stated? -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:53, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Absolutely not. You have no right to have such a bet on your terms, as I'm doing this for your fucking gain, and putting something on the table for me to lose. It's a joke if you are going to think I will abuse the admin system with something so personal when it can be completed here and now, where it should have been done. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 02:56, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
It's hardly abuse, I don't think you do the things you claim you do, your side of this rests on that quality, we have a disagreement that needs enforceable resolution. If you want me to throw something personal in, I'll stake a one month ban if I can't prove any fault with the entry as it stands. A whole month without me if you're as sure as you seem to be, surely you can't pass that up? -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 03:01, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Don't flatter yourself; I'm indifferent to your presence. It is abuse and as such I will not be taking this through the admin system at all. I don't have the time to pursue this anymore. Now I can't say I didn't try and get you to fess up. I guess the A/VD entry will stand. Your loss anyway. And before you ever try and say I pulled out because I didn't want to lose my badge, I'll say it now, I'm disgusted that I even had to try and put my position of authority on the line just so you could have your justice, and the fact you still insisted on having this done on your terms, well, let's just say you must have some very concerning issues when it comes to asking for someone to do you a favour, lest one you claim to deserve. Compared to that, my "OCD" feels like a charm. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 03:08, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
You offer terms, I ask you you ensure they're enforceable given my doubts about your 'word', you refuse citing you have something on the line and I don't, I offer an appropriate stake to your own, you pull out of the whole thing claiming that it's not about the obvious conclusions.... and then followed with a personal "You must be fucked in the head" personal attack, smooth. I know how this will be viewed. Someone who is sure about their convictions, theories and data, as you claimed to be, would never hesitate to back it up with an enforceable agreement. You're either aware that the entry is forged, or you really like that badge, it matters not to me but might to you. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 03:16, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Neither. I just want you to shut the fuck up about your persecution with the most easily solved method of all: having yourself tell us what the problem is. If I go as far as this without an answer, the hell I'm going to make a spectacle out of it on A/A. You had your chance, now you can wallow in the cesspit of bitterness once more. And in terms of you being fucked in the head, don't take it so personally. I'm just bouncing back some well deserved "Let's clinically diagnose the other party with a mental problem based on their wiki behaviour to get them fired up". In some ways you should be flattered you've been observed for long enough for one to even conclude something like that. I have work now. See ya. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 03:23, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
If it's neither then I see no reason why you'd be reluctant to make it enforceable, after all if the badge means nothing and you're sure of the entry then I must lose, mustn't I? I lose and I go away until nearly Christmas, when you'll need me back to get rid of all the stupid festive suggestions. Let's remember that you were the one to offer the incentive but offer absolutely no assurances that you'd go through with it. "Brave Sir Robin ran away. Bravely ran away away. When danger reared it's ugly head, he bravely turned his tail and fled. Yes, brave Sir Robin turned about and gallantly he chickened out. Bravely taking to his feet, he beat a very brave retreat. Bravest of the brave, Sir Robin!" -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 03:34, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
You fool, you really don't get it. It's not about "winning" or "losing", it's about finding the truth, and making the best out of a bad situation. Even doing the above stunts, if I can't get you to just tell us a simple opinion, then fuck it, you don't deserve to have A/VD "fixed". --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 08:35, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Look, I'm not trying to start a screaming fight, and you comign in here guns blazing won't help, Iscariot. If there's any way to achieve a solution, it'll be through discussion. Now, I agree, DDR, Iscariot didn't explain what he actually thought should be correct, but all he wants is for it to go back how it was before Boxy made the edit. Both are technically wrong, and if he wants to go with the solution which is harsher on himself, then by all means, I see no reason for it not to happen. In your opinion, why shouldn't the data be reverted?--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 12:32, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
As I predicted, the lies not only don't get removed, but he falls back on his argument of prove it without doing the same himself. And then takes the extremely petty action of targeting me again, he doesn't go de-escalate any other user, just fucking me. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 15:42, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Because thanks to a series of absolute and almost certainly unreversable fuckups, Iscariots history will never truly be what it should have been, Iscariot knows it and that's why he isn't co-operating with us anywhere near as much as he'd like to imagine. If Iscariot did have an "ace in the hole" in regards to fixing the A/VD problem and proving us wrong, he would have used it by now instead of bleating madly and then falling back on a sulk-fest. At leased boxy looked through the histories of what the wiki can behold, and based his action on that. And I say it now that it is a whole lot more correct than the "reverted state" that Iscariot wants. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 13:18, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
"Unreversable", I think you mean "irreversible", why aren't those fuck ups irreversible? You're happy to use the "override policy whenever they decide" clause to try and force through something on J3D's talkpage, but not in this instance? It's easy to see which situation that clause was actually there for.... I'll also point out that I've told you where, when and how far to look back/at to fix this, yet you're happy to allow fraud and argue for the continuation of it, but not fix it. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 15:42, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Once again, Iscariot, don't try to argue, or you won't even be able to reach a compromise. I've had a look, and I see what you mean about it being screwed up DDR. And there isn't really any way to fix it further than what it is, unless someone turns up with the perfect answer all of a sudden.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 16:25, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
A time machine is needed, obviously. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:04, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Until you prove, and I mean PROVE otherwise, as opposed to just whinge, there is no fraud to have been done. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 01:24, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
I have to 'prove' things beyond all doubt and Boxy doesn't? Double standard much? Why doesn't Boxy have to 'prove' everything in detail beyond doubt before he changed it? That'd be because he can't, and you won't even put the data back to how it was before he started to meddle and lie to help any future investigation. Anyone else would have got this... -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 01:54, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
No no no. Stop making me repeat myself more. Boxy looked through the history, exactly the way you asked him/me to, and changed it. That's enough proof. Especially until you can bring yourself to bring a more definite method of fixing this to the table. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 02:24, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

So, what's the real edit supposed to look like? What should the A/VD look like? If nobody can answer this, why should it be changed? --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:01, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I can't remember exactly, somewhere along the line I think Nubis incorrectly escalated Iscariot without grounds, after Link de-escalated it as per the ruling in a misconduct case. Something like that. Regardless, the end result was Iscariot's A/VD was fucked up beyond comprehension. Boxy and I backtracked through the histories of A/VD and A/M and Boxy eventually "fixed" it as much as could be done, with the exception of a week ban which Iscariot was given despite it only should have been 24hours, meaning he can theoretically justly avoid multiple bans when the occasions arise. It's all on here. Inb4 "that's not right at all DDR but I shall refuse to actually explain what the "correct" outcome should be". --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 01:35, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
The first actual acknowledgement of part of the fraud? Altering one section but not another which then implies it to be the correct escalation to be taken? And no fucking where has Boxy ever said that I can 'claim' that time back on future bans. If he had that thought (and I severely doubt given his petty conduct that he ever did) then the correct place to lodge this would have been on VD itself rather than secreting the information away as thisis where any escalating sysop would go to check things, no? -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 01:54, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Awww, you finally explained it, that wasn't so hard, was it? What a shame there. He did say it. In fact, it was the first thing he said once he fixed it. Check talk:A/VD. Sheesh. Can't believe this whole QQathon was just because you were incapable of reading a statement. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 01:58, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
That's not even half of it, and you know it, why else would I have told you when to start from? Talk:A/VD doesn't address the intentional falsehood, nor the pure hypocrisy in that one part. I'm sure you'll offer to change it, but you're prone to saying you'll do stuff and never doing so. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:02, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
I offered to change it once I'd heard what "it should have been changed to", and why do think I never changed it? Because you never explicitly explained to me what your version of the "truth" was, nor have you yet. The offer stands. God knows how many times I'm going to have to say that before this shitfight ends. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 02:07, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
You've offered to do things before and not done them, why should I expect different? Why is it unreasonable to ask sysops to look over a disputed VD record? Especially given that I gave you the starting point long before this began... You're a sysop, you volunteer to do work on this wiki, do some yourself for once. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:19, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
The way I remember it, you did ask, we all looked, and we changed it accordingly, and that's what got us into this massive bitchfest. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 02:22, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Please link me to the edit where I say "Please de-escalate me". -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:28, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Lol, you are incapable of asking for anything so politely. I might dig up some quotes of "*throws link at DDR* There is something wrong with my A/VD. Here are links. Enjoy looking through page histories for the next hour" and the sad thing is, I wish I was joking with that impersonation. The fact is, you requested we look through your A/VD history and have it rectified, with no notice as to what exactly the problem was, Boxy did the same as I and changed it accordingly. You cry? Until you can explain exactly what was done incorrectly, keep crying. End of story, I've had it with this ping-pong event of "Explain yourself" "NEVER!" attitude. Come to us with the good or nothing shall happen. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 02:33, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Stuff I really should archive

17 Oct 09

there you go

CLICK ME NOW FOO delete please k thanx bye! Also you have a LOT of crap on this page O_O -- Emot-argh.gif 18:29, 17 October 2009 (BST)

thinkin bout

a/vb for jed, you down? Cyberbob  Talk  07:10, 17 October 2009 (BST)

Meh. If he starts another stupid group like it after this one goes, I guess. Maybe a soft warning at this stage? -- boxy talk • teh rulz 07:13 17 October 2009 (BST)
I'll verbally warn him on his talk page Cyberbob  Talk  07:15, 17 October 2009 (BST)

Go this

Any idea about this? Seems to be a ghost page? --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 09:50, 9 October 2009 (BST)

Yep, but no idea of a fix. Cheese and DDR have had a go at this stuff -- boxy talk • teh rulz 09:54 9 October 2009 (BST)
Special:Uncategorizedpages, same deal as ghost images. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 09:56, 9 October 2009 (BST)

Suggestions

Suggestions/RejectedMay2007

and

Suggestions/RejectedMarch2007

Are on the orphaned list. Should they be archived somewhere? --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 10:26, 30 September 2009 (BST)

They are archived, where they are ;)
But no, I don't think rejected archived were linked to any central list. Man, that old system was convoluted, with built in duplications... If I had the time, I wouldn't mind moving all of it into the Suggestions namespace, perhaps all on individual suggestions pages, but it would take some planning to do it right first time -- boxy talk • teh rulz 12:41 1 October 2009 (BST)
It does sound like a massive job. How many pages we talking about? --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 13:15, 1 October 2009 (BST)
Well, not that many pages at the moment (that's not including the peer reviewed ones though). But if we were going to make them all individuals, I guess there would be more... I haven't really looked into it. Would be hard making sure that links (for dupes mostly) were fixed though -- boxy talk • teh rulz 13:23 1 October 2009 (BST)
So moving all individual suggestions to the current system? As a stop gap could you Remove each suggestion to a new page and leave a link in its place on the original multi suggestion page? You could then return to fix the redirects later.--RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 13:32, 1 October 2009 (BST)
Yep, guess so. Would make for easier targeted searching of suggestions, especially if they are appropriately named pages. I've even been meaning to go through the current suggestions namespace, and renaming some of the more randomly named ones with something descriptive of the actual suggestion -- boxy talk • teh rulz 13:43 1 October 2009 (BST)

Right rather than discussing this here, where might be the appropriate discussion page? --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 14:32, 1 October 2009 (BST)

Oh, one of the suggestions talk pages... so many to choose from. I'll have a look next time I'm on -- boxy talk • teh rulz 15:08 1 October 2009 (BST)
Moved here -- boxy talk • teh rulz 03:19 3 October 2009 (BST)

Signatures

Why has no one gone on about Iscariot's signature yet? It's clearly in violation of the policy. Moreso than many past banned user's signatures. Either you guys are playing nice becuase you don't want to start a troll off with him or you've decided not to enforce the policy as it always has been. There is no clear link, it's impossible to tell it's him without looking at codeview, the image is clearly oversized and against policy spirit, deal with it plox. --Karekmaps?! 12:58, 17 September 2009 (BST)

It takes 2 seconds to go to his talk page and find out that you're wrong, idiot. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 13:33, 17 September 2009 (BST)
A whole 2 days wrong, I may add. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 13:34, 17 September 2009 (BST)
Oh, so because you don't know the policy I'm wrong? Nope, not quite. Your comment on his page was incorrect, we've banned users for trying to do just that in the past. The intent of the signature policy is to make it so that 1)The signature doesn't get in the way of the usage of the page. and 2)That it's clear who the user signing is. If he were to replace the mouseover text on the first image with User:Iscariot that would be acceptable to that purpose. Making one character a link to a user subpage is not and users have been banned for that in the past regardless of whether you're willing to take the time to familiarize yourself with the enforcement and reasons for the signature policy or not. I'm not saying ban him, I'm saying enforce the policy as it's meant to be since it clearly isn't and hasn't been here. I don't care if that means telling him on his user page or telling him through A/VB but it means telling him, and apparently you, what the policy limits and why we have the policy in the first place. --Karekmaps?! 13:56, 17 September 2009 (BST)
One would assume consistency was your strong point. One would think my image links made it easy enough to "see who made the post", as that's all that matters, yes? I've told him his sig is illegal. He mentions that it was the intent of my post on his User:Iscariot/PD/1 page. He has a week to change it, and if it isn't acceptable afterwards we can deal with it through A/VB or further via his talk page (depending on whether my description of what was legal is wrong or right), at leased I did something about it, so don't say no one's gone on about his signature. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 14:07, 17 September 2009 (BST)
Sorry, I missed it in the page content. Yes, he was talked to, it's not the issue I'm commenting on but he certainly was talked to and I missed it. The issue here still needs to be address, a few of them do actually. The image is against the spirit of the current and last update to the sig policy(it's functionally equivalent to {{Blink}} even if it's not text). The user needs to be easily identifiable from the signature itself(making the first link mouseover User:Iscariot or Iscariot would do this). These are things necessary to the purpose of the signature and since I'm obviously not able to bring the issue up with him directly in any real manner without it devolving I'm bringing it up here. The rest is because this isn't something easily missed due to the widespread use of the signature in current discussions on administrative pages, the fact that it hasn't been brought up yet is a matter to be hassled over since I tend to work on the assumption that one takes the time to familiarize themselves with general enforcement of a rule along with it's purpose and that doesn't seem to have been done here. Just because he wants to change the policy doesn't mean it's an issue you drop for the week or so, that week exists so as to provide a clear show of unwillingness to address issues as brought up, not to let him use it for a week before it's addressed. Basically, no one's addressed the problem qualitatively, Just doing it is not the same as doing something about it. --Karekmaps?! 14:37, 17 September 2009 (BST)
It's my first time enforcing something that breaks the signature policy, I just did it in the method I thought was right, so I accept it if I didn't do it correctly. I do agree with the issue that it hasn't been brought up further but maybe the sysops were just content that he was warned in the first place, dunno. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 14:44, 17 September 2009 (BST)
One reason I havn't gone on about it, is that I haven't had time for my usual share of dealing with drama lately... and it's down the priority list, given that it's a templated sig, it is obivous who owns it, looking at the code, unlike last time it came up. But I do agree that it should be changed, before the week is out, because people shouldn't have to go trawling through source code, page histories or click on the image to find out who signed a post -- boxy talk • teh rulz 15:00 17 September 2009 (BST)

That "invite only" (ie. circle jerk) policy discussion is based on a flawed concept. First line (after the threats) is "Whereas user creativity is at the core of the wiki concept and new and different ways of expressing one's self and personalising the wiki experience is to be encouraged". There is plenty of space for "user creativity", but signatures is not the place to let creativity overshadow functionality. Signatures have a very clear function on the wiki, to make it easy for others to identify who has made a comment in a way that doesn't detract from the text based discussion it is inserted into. By the look of the history of his sig, Iscariot has made it his goal to make a signature that is as hard as possible to identify the user link, and he's been warned for it before. It's bad enough that images are included in sigs now, but this introduces into policy a concept that will encourage every newbie to "express themselves" by inserting images into every discussion they are involved in. Sigs are there to identify the poster first and foremost, secondly they should not detract from the readability of the text discussions that go on on a wiki, and way down the list, they can provide a level of personal flair, but it shouldn't conflict with the main purposes of the sig.
When multiple "user owned" images are used, the reader has no idea which one redirects to what page (plain links, FTW). Suggesting that images currently named after users can just be overwritten is just not on. The whole required "set-up process" is just going to go out the window, because every newbie that turns up will just do it, probably by including images from others signatures... it's the way the wiki code-stealer concept works, it's human nature.
It's writing into policy something that, if it becomes widespread, will be a complete pain in the arse, both from sig functionality, and from an administration perspective -- boxy talk • teh rulz 14:44 17 September 2009 (BST)

Basically yes and, I understand the invite only thing isn't enforceable on his part, he's asking for discussion limiting it on a policy proposal without bad faith isn't a viable use or page ownership. I know this. I don't think it's worth starting a fight over it though. I'd rather make the issues known and then consider a more constructive way to address it such as starting a discussion on other methods of dealing with the issue. In particular a more noticeable and content correct guide to signatures(Signatures Guideline) seems the most appropriate method coupled with redacting from the policy as necessary. However, this is currently one of the most concise and simple policies on the wiki, the most it really needs, as far as I can tell, is an exception for moderating them as opposed to enforcing, signatures outside the policy that obviously don't break the spirit should be able to be kept and it should be saved to truly bad faith signatures and truly bad faith refusals. --Karekmaps?! 15:01, 17 September 2009 (BST)

Well Played

Looks like the mall's gonna swap back to you zeds.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 17:32, 9 September 2009 (BST)

Confirming Groups

I'll admit, in retrospect creating the new pages wasn't the best idea, since they're liable to drop off at any moment. the category, however, was for sorting purposes; about two thirds of the groups in the origional don't belong there anymore, so I found it would be easier to sort the actual stat-page groups out than the other way around. The groups are free to be deleted; the category as well (once I finish, of course). Sorry if this seems like unnecissary mess.--~ Red Hawk One Talk | space for lease 19:01, 7 September 2009 (BST)

It's probably going to get messy, and be a neverending job. Frankly, I'd just get rid of the confirmed group category all together. It's a remnant of a passed wiki-era, when defunct groups got crit 12 speedydeleted. It has no real function any more. I'll put those group pages up for deletion, if they're still around -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:29 8 September 2009 (BST)

I've been thinking...

I may soon apply for sysopship. What would be your opinion on the matter? (And in fact, if you're reading this, and aren't Boxy, what would be YOUR opinion?) I've made a substantial amount of edits of recent, primarily to the suburb pages. I've been archiving news posts, which I'll be doing again on the 12th, and I'm in the process of adding icons to the headers of the suburb pages. Although I've been trollish in the past, I've worked on it recently, and would do even more so if I were to run for sysop. I tried asking Link about this first, but he hasn't responded yet. So, what do you think? Should I run, or not?--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 18:11, 6 September 2009 (BST)

Ah, you've been the one adding these icons, eh? I find them annoying, as it stuffs up the links in edit summaries... um, anyway... you'd probably be advised to contribute more around A/PD type discussions, showing an understanding of the way the wiki works -- boxy talk • teh rulz 13:14 7 September 2009 (BST)
Ah well, I asked before originally starting the adds, and there was no oppositiion then, so I assumed it'd be okay.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 13:55, 7 September 2009 (BST)
I'm a hard user to please when it comes to A/PM, and if you were to do anything that improves your chances I would recommend engaging with the users in the admin spots like deletions, vandalbanning, misconduct, policy discussion, etc. I vouch users that have experience with the userbase and have clear experience with the parts that the admin job entails, it can about doing masses and masses of work, but I like it when ops do a fair bit of both. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 13:38, 7 September 2009 (BST)
derpa derpa iron hard veteran~ Cyberbob  Talk  13:46, 7 September 2009 (BST)
ddr's right though - getting involved in admin discussions a bit more would improve your odds via showing people how you'd generally go with ruling on cases and whatnot if you were promoted. Cyberbob  Talk  13:46, 7 September 2009 (BST)
Well, I frequently view them, but I keep out of things like a/vb, because as you've said, I'm not experienced enough to make real judgement calls, even on the talks. I make a comment now and again, but not really so much. I'd add myself to the arbitrator list, but personally, I feel we have too many arbitrators already, as we get very few abries cases, and when we do, several hundred arbitrators jump on the case. I ask for the occasional speedy delete on stub pages, but haven't done much. I'll be sure to pay more attention in this field.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 13:55, 7 September 2009 (BST)
There's nothing wrong with that, but usually those that stay out of drama nests do a lot of work to become ops. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 13:57, 7 September 2009 (BST)
Fair enough. Well, I'll try to do more in the way of a/vb and such then. I assume you mean discussion on the talk for it then?--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 13:58, 7 September 2009 (BST)
Yeah, just try and help out everywhere where you find wiki activity, really. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 14:01, 7 September 2009 (BST)
Needs moar drama. A/VB, A/A (though that one very rarely happens), A/M, and A/PD.--Umbrella-White.pngThadeous OakleyUmbrella-White.png 13:48, 7 September 2009 (BST)

Conn Reevaluation

UDWiki:Administration/Re-Evaluations#User:Conndraka
Thoughts? Linkthewindow  Talk  08:24, 3 September 2009 (BST)

I think it's clear that he hasn't had community support/trust for a long time -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:28 3 September 2009 (BST)
Sounds about right. Linkthewindow  Talk  09:55, 4 September 2009 (BST)
Yeeeehaaawwww--CyberRead240 09:56, 4 September 2009 (BST)
quick someone make a template.--xoxo 04:31, 5 September 2009 (BST)

Eastwood

Not sure if you're a foxtel man, but Movie Greats is showing Every Which Way But Loose and the sequel every couple of days, if you're interested. "Left turn, Clyde" :D --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 03:53, 31 August 2009 (BST)

"Any which way you can"? But alas, no foxtel here -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:27 31 August 2009 (BST)
Yeah, that's the sequel. The opening credits have Clint Eastwood singing a duet with Ray Charles, it's brilliant. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 10:32, 31 August 2009 (BST)
You haven't seen real talent until you've heard a Clint Eastwood/Lee Marvin duet :P -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:59 31 August 2009 (BST)
Ugh... Just for that, I'm delaying my viewing of Blade Runner by 2 more weeks!!! >=D --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 12:59, 31 August 2009 (BST)
You'll miss the Harrison Ford/Rutger Hauer duet at the end :p
Lee Marvin awesomeness (well, a tribute actually) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 13:54 31 August 2009 (BST)
Ha. I just finished the Indiana Jones marathon on Movie One... I think I'm all Harrison Forded out :'( --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 13:59, 31 August 2009 (BST)

Undecided

I suppose there IS not much difference. What is see is that those suggestion that go to Peer Rejected are dead. No chance of resurrection. However, the ones in Undecided have SOME redeeming quality or potential for it. It may have just been happenstance that the vote wasn't enough or maybe changes in the game would allow for a retry for them (as opposed to Peer Rejected which, most likely, wouldn't work regardless of game changes). Undecided was ALMOST keepable, it just needs some little tweak to get it over the edge.--Pesatyel 19:00, 30 August 2009 (BST)

Well undecided are keepable... they did get a majority of keeps after all. It's not like getting in to Peer Reviewed is some huge WIN for a suggestion... most of them never get implemented anyway. I see it as just a way for Kevan to get new ideas and gauge the userbase's opinion on how the game is traveling -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:26 31 August 2009 (BST)

23 Aug 09

Your mother is a whore

and I love it--/~Rakuen~\Talk Domo.gif I Still Love Grim 09:47, 23 August 2009 (BST)

yo momma's givin' it away... and still no takers -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:05 23 August 2009 (BST)
Yo momma likes penis. --/~Rakuen~\Talk Domo.gif I Still Love Grim 10:08, 23 August 2009 (BST)
No your dad likes penis--DOWN WITH THE 'CRATS!!! | Join Nod!!! 16:55, 24 August 2009 (BST)

20090820 Zombie hunter Skill

HEY FUCK YOU YOU ARE JUST A BUTTHURT CUZ MY SUGGESTION WAS WINNING AND YOUR LAME COMMENT WAS MARKET AS SPAM THAT PROVES WHAT I BELIVE ZOMBIES RULE THE GAME AND GET UNFAIR ADVANTAGES —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rambo voller (talk • contribs) 20:53, August 20, 2009).

Hey, I'm not the one butthurt enough to sockpuppet an internet vote on a games wiki -- boxy talk • teh rulz 22:00 20 August 2009 (BST)
I prefer the part where he points out your vote was marked spam. God bless capslock.--RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 22:02, 20 August 2009 (BST)
Actually, your suggestion was losing. Even with your crazy alts, it was 17 to 7. Maths fail.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 22:14, 20 August 2009 (BST)

They are all from similar area, hmm? Have we a new BBK clique? --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 00:39, 21 August 2009 (BST)

You say it like thats a bad thing.--CyberRead240 07:13, 21 August 2009 (BST)
Only because I don't want us to feel replaced, dude. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 07:19, 21 August 2009 (BST)
Many will try, but none will come close to the glory days. We still hold the power, its just hiding in the shadows waiting to pounce.--CyberRead240 08:31, 21 August 2009 (BST)
Ha ha!!! Don't let them know just yet dude --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 08:55, 21 August 2009 (BST)

killing the wiki, your job to save it now!

Yo. We've had this talk before a few weeks ago but I need you to review my creation of the page UDWiki:Administration/Protections/Scheduling/Archive to archive the protection bid, on account of me not being able to find an archive for scheduled protections (maybe they were just purged after a while)? I'm tired and it might actually be out there... Or maybe the scheduled protections that already existed were made so through policy, I don't know atm.

Basically, can you check the page UDWiki:Administration/Protections/Scheduling/Archive if that page shouldn't be there, please consider this a request for crit 7 (and a crit 1) and delete it on sight after reverting this edit please.

Also while I'm here, check out A/RE and move it/fix it accordingly if I bunged anything up?

thanks, tired ddr 15:39, 19 August 2009 (BST)

Looks pretty good to me. Buggered if I can find those old scheduled protections. Probably purged -- boxy talk • teh rulz 21:40 19 August 2009 (BST)
Thanks. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 00:39, 20 August 2009 (BST)

SIGNING YOUR POSTS IS SUPER FUCKING IMPORTANT!!!

EVERYONE SIGN YOUR POSTS OR BOXY WILL LEAVE A VERY MEAN .GIF ON YOUR PAGE!!! :[ :[ :[ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AnonSantlerville (talk • contribs) 11:17, August 17, 2009.

Too right... and they should learn how to use headers too -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:28 17 August 2009 (BST)

uh oh somebodyws gettin wurked up about her wiki rules!!!@!1 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AnonSantlerville (talk • contribs) 11:34, August 17, 2009.

You are a complete bitch

Go fucking clean the sand out of your nasty ass cunt AnonSantlerville 03:45, 16 August 2009 (BST)

Dammit, I already used the tears of impotent rage image on Read. Cyberbob  Talk  03:55, 16 August 2009 (BST)
Talk about a header fail as well. I see you've learned to sign as well. That's always good. Linkthewindow  Talk  04:00, 16 August 2009 (BST)
Yay -- boxy talk • teh rulz 04:01 16 August 2009 (BST)

Janitor

If you're around, I have a quick task for you to do. Template:Group contact= and the similar pages (check either user contribs or "whatlinkshere" from the actual image) should be in namespaces/recruit formatting/deleted, whatever suits. I'm at uni and don't have the time just now so if you're on today, to give it a go, I'd appreciate it. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 04:41, 11 August 2009 (BST)

I think I got it worked out -- boxy talk • teh rulz 07:43 11 August 2009 (BST)
Thanks. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 09:17, 11 August 2009 (BST)

Thanks for the info

Makes using the wiki a bit easier.--Degree7 05:11, 10 August 2009 (BST)

Chekken

Do you think the creation of that Colonel bustass page warrants a trip to A/VB? Cyberbob  Talk  04:23, 10 August 2009 (BST)

I told him not to do it again, on his talk page, before noticing the group page thing. Just a newbie (perhaps n00by) thing, I think. If he does similar again, I would though -- boxy talk • teh rulz 04:28 10 August 2009 (BST)
Righto. Cyberbob  Talk  04:31, 10 August 2009 (BST)
So let me get this straight...I can't create pages on groups and people that entered into a rather sizeable siege on a fort and were rather important players, but you can go ahead and make slanderous comments on your talk page about me for all the world to see? Talk behind my back? That just goes to show that authority is not always right. And don't go saying things like "you did the same thing slandering Bustass and her group": you know for a fact that it was intended to be humorous. Lighten up! It's a joke. -- Chekken 03:23, 11 August 2009 (BST)
Only it's not very funny... creepy does seem to fit though -- boxy talk • teh rulz 03:27 11 August 2009 (BST)
After having heard about the requests on IRC for naked photos I'll second the "creepy" motion. Cyberbob  Talk  03:32, 11 August 2009 (BST)
Acutall Chekken, you were a lot more slanderous about it, and the way you went about it. That's why I said something originally to Bob on his talk page. -Poodle of doom 03:40, 11 August 2009 (BST)
That doesn't mean that you can be slanderous to me on a different page. It's practically the same thing. I find it hard to believe that you would use hostile terms towards somebody who is new to your community. But you did. That is slander. -- Chekken 03:53, 11 August 2009 (BST)
We don't need a reason to be slanderous ;p
Seriously though. User pages and group pages shouldn't be edited in such a way, unless you're very sure that the people who own them would approve of what you're doing with them. I see no indication that Col. Bustass wants you making up shit about her, and the group she used to belong to, so keep your fantasies to your own group or user pages, please -- boxy talk • teh rulz 03:57 11 August 2009 (BST)
Here we go again. More insults. "Fantasies"? Pardon me, but what in the blue hell are you talking about? I'm going to say it for the millionth time: it is satire. If it isn't funny, I'll take some suggestions and rewrite it. It is not a "fantasy", I am not TRYING to be creepy. It wasn't even finished yet; it was a work in progress. Now if somebody had BOTHERED to show me where the template for that is, I would have put it on my page and accepted criticism as humbly as I could. If it isn't funny, you comment on it on the discussion page, not send it immediately for deletion. --Chekken 04:04, 11 August 2009 (BST)
Don't bother answering, Boxy. This one is well-versed in the art of self-convincing. Cyberbob  Talk  04:07, 11 August 2009 (BST)
How do you figure I was being slanderous towards you Chekken? I'd like to see proof of that. WAIT!! I GOT A BETTER IDEA!!! Let's take your attitude towards me and the rest of the community to Arbitration if you really think I'm that dead set on brining you down. Shit! Maybe even boxy or bob here would like to volenteer as Arbitrator? -Poodle of doom 04:13, 11 August 2009 (BST)
I have no attitude towards "the community" at all; how can I even have an opinion in the first place? I haven't MET the community yet. And if my welcome party will be a bunch of people insulting and excessively criticising my work, then maybe this is not where I should be spending my time. My problem is you GOING AROUND on MY PAGES...the pages I myself have written...and insulting me. If you have a problem with me, then you can be man enough to go on my talk page and send me a message explaining what is wrong. Yeah, you really expect me to go to Arbitration so that I can participate in (what I assume will be) a one-sided, biased session and be ganged up on? Well hell, if you want to so badly, I would love to be insulted further and embarrassed in front of the community. Oh, and your spelling is off. Might want to fix that. --Chekken 04:22, 11 August 2009 (BST)
Sigh. Cyberbob  Talk  04:25, 11 August 2009 (BST)
Shouldn’t put down a dyslexic fellow for having a few spelling issues. On that note,…. Bob, Boxy,… either or both of you care to join us? -Poodle of doom 04:29, 11 August 2009 (BST)
I think Bob's trying to drop me a subtle cue to let it go.... right? -Poodle of doom 04:31, 11 August 2009 (BST)
You know what? This is really stupid. I don't even understand what we're fighting about anymore. Delete the damn article if it's such a poke in the butthole for you guys. Just...can I have suggestions first before an article is deleted? I will observe the rules about group/individual wiki's in the future. And Boxy, I'm sorry. --Chekken 04:35, 11 August 2009 (BST)

Can you re-upload an image?

Firulais.jpg
Image:Firulais.jpg was deleted last month for lack of use. However, it is still in use in the Dulston News Archive. I've asked the deleter, and learned that deletion cannot be undone. So, I'm asking you, as the original uploader of that image, to upload it again, if you still have it. -- Kittithaj 20:36, 30 July 2009 (BST)
Done -- boxy talk • teh rulz 21:24 30 July 2009 (BST)

Page move

Hey can I get that Smooth Criminals page moved now please? Thanks -- Emot-argh.gif 03:05, 27 July 2009 (BST)
A/MR.--xoxo 03:06, 27 July 2009 (BST)
Done'd -- boxy talk • teh rulz 09:17 27 July 2009 (BST)
yeah don't worry about procedures or anything. How about i just make A/MR redirect right here??--xoxo 09:36, 27 July 2009 (BST)
Hey, hey chuckles. Don't sweat it. There's already been a request put on that page for this move, and I said I'd do it once the deletions request was served. We don't need to go through A/MR for moves anyway, it's just more convenient to do so for non-sysops -- boxy talk • teh rulz 09:43 27 July 2009 (BST)
There is nothing in the guidelines to say a sysop can only move pages via A/MR. It is only deleting things and, I think, protecting things. --ϑϑℜ 09:55, 27 July 2009 (BST)
And banning things ;) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 09:56 27 July 2009 (BST)
yawn thanks for that charlie.--xoxo 13:25, 27 July 2009 (BST)
If that's sarcasm, I won't be impressed... --ϑϑℜ 13:27, 27 July 2009 (BST)
Sorry, it was :P come down one weekend and we'll hit it up a'ight? --xoxo 13:34, 27 July 2009 (BST)

Welcomenewbie Template

Hey Boxy. Wanted to ask: why is the {{subst:WN}} version of the Welcomenewbie template is protected, while the main one isn't?--User:Axe27/Sig 21:26, 23 July 2009 (BST)

To prevent newbies from editing it by following header links like from this page. Here's the protection request -- boxy talk • teh rulz 22:31 23 July 2009 (BST)
Ok, thanks. I had forgotten about that protection request. --User:Axe27/Sig 22:47, 23 July 2009 (BST)

Yap

You're right. Why I did that, I have no idea.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 18:38, 23 July 2009 (BST)

>.>

Dam your on a roll http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Special:Contributions/Boxy --DOWN WITH THE 'CRATS!!! | Join Nod!!! 10:45, 21 July 2009 (BST)

Didn't you know? It's his way of mind-controlling the users of UDWiki, some sort of conspiracy, I bet. --ϑϑℜ 10:48, 21 July 2009 (BST)
Yes, well that's quite enough of that, for now ;) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:12 21 July 2009 (BST)

Thanks for the Save

I was 99% sure that changing that variable on the Locationblock wouldn't affect single block buildings given the supposed list of possible calls. It didn't when I checked a few pages either...3 minutes after the edit and when the job queue was probably still chugging along...whoops... -- User:The Rooster RoosterDragon User talk:The Rooster 15:32, 16 July 2009 (BST)

No worries. Putting that variable in there ended up calling a template in the name of the block, instead of the block type -- boxy talk • teh rulz 22:06 16 July 2009 (BST)

Can i get a clean up in aisle 4

that or your opinion on my a/vb-ed comment.--xoxo 14:03, 15 July 2009 (BST)


Disk Space is Cheap!

I'm back. Oh yeah, never gonna leave you alone, I'm back, oh yeah...--User:Axe27/Sig 00:19, 15 July 2009 (BST)

You was so smart

UDWiki:Administration/Deletions/Scheduling/Archive#Pornography --xoxo 11:10, 7 July 2009 (BST)

Seriously

Leave me alone and mind your own damn business. I'm not causing any problems, and your precious Grim who you put so much faith in to deal with my previous cases turned out to be the fascist bastard I always said he was. Leave me alone and you won't even know I'm here. Messenger 02:55, 5 July 2009 (BST)

I think I've made myself clear

with my last few edits; I'm willing to be a vandal if you're going to treat me as one. I'm not going anywhere. I've been banned for nearly three years; yet here I am. I've tried merely slipping under the radar, doing my own thing and not bothering anyone. Even months after any previous activity, I am hunted down as soon as any hint of my identity is uncovered. I can be a good girl; or I can be a stinking, rotten vandal, and muck up your time with A/VB cases day in and day out if I really must. It is your call. Can you live and let live, and let the last two and a half years serve as my punishment, or must we continue the song and dance of old? Don't prove yourself an arrogant fool. I have no bad faith, despite your arduous claims to the contrary, I'm only a vandal when you force me to be. So what is your say, Boxy? No Escape 07:32, 5 July 2009 (BST)

3 Jul 09

REVOLUTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Revolution.jpg Anti-Bureaucracy
This user hates bureaucracy and encourages wiki-revolution!

DOWN WITH THE CRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! --Imthatguy 18:25, 3 July 2009 (BST)

New Scheduled Deletion

Hey, I'd like to ask a bit of advice regarding the new scheduled deletion which I approved today. I've added it to the list of Scheduled's on the administration guidelines, do you also think we should strike the crit here? I added a note, but was concerned striking it would lead to users thinking it was invalidated as C12. Thoughts? DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 03:09, 30 June 2009 (BST)

Just leave it as an SD criterion, although we perhaps need to discuss putting a list of scheduled deletions on the page as well, so that people can nominate them using the A/SD page if needed -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:29 30 June 2009 (BST)
You read my mind! Not sure though, cause scheduled deletions are generally deleted as they come, not many users look through the depths of specialpages for them, and if they do, they know what they are doing anyway. It would help, I guess. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 12:18, 30 June 2009 (BST)
Well it needs to be made clear that posting lists on SD from the specialpages isn't helpful. They are got to when they're got to, but if a scheduled page is come across, or created by someone who wants it gone, they can request it on a/sd. But perhaps a discussion on talk SD to see what others views are -- boxy talk • teh rulz 12:48 30 June 2009 (BST)
omg you guys are are sooooo like intune!!!elvn --xoxo 12:22, 30 June 2009 (BST)
You'll need to fight to get your sweetheart back ;P -- boxy talk • teh rulz 12:48 30 June 2009 (BST)
nah boxy you're all mine and i know it.--xoxo 13:15, 30 June 2009 (BST)
haha jed ur like teh king of sayan shit deliberately wit bad grammer to make wat ur sayan really really sarcastic (with lots of exclamation marks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(and some numbers)11 --Cyberbob 22:03, 30 June 2009 (BST)
Me too :) --xoxo 22:34, 2 July 2009 (BST)

Thanks for fixing up my typo on the Guidelines. I must have had a brain explosion because I hit the wrong Crit. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 12:18, 2 July 2009 (BST)

Recategorisation

I remember you had a spree of edits a while ago that was you recategorising certain images. Assuming you didn't finish, is it anything I can help with? DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 16:27, 26 June 2009 (BST)

Oh, I work on Category:Page Elements every now and then. Trying to separate out all the sub-category images that should be in Ribbons, Icons, Emoticons, Group Images, Maps, Screenshots, etc. It's become a sort of a catchall category, full of stuff that should be elsewhere -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:37 27 June 2009 (BST)
I absolutely agree. The system fails because those extra categories aren't features on the Template:Image Categorisation, imo, thats where most users learn. I may fix it up later on. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 13:43, 27 June 2009 (BST)

Scarletwood Junkyards

10-4, thanks for the heads-up. --Jaeger ayers 02:22, 25 June 2009 (BST)

Erm

Voting on that scheduled thing isn't over yet mang. --Cyberbob 13:34, 21 June 2009 (BST)

Which, wat? Redirects after page moves are already sched'ed, otherwise I don't know what you're talking about -- boxy talk • teh rulz 13:37 21 June 2009 (BST)
Oh, it was from a move? I didn't spot that, nevermind then --Cyberbob 13:39, 21 June 2009 (BST)
idiot!!!!!--xoxo 16:10, 23 June 2009 (BST)

Thanks

Thanks for helping on my Beginners Guide. -Poodle of doom 01:15, 19 June 2009 (BST)

EVIL.jpg EVIL IS GOOD
This user or group believes that the bad guys can sometimes be the good guys.
Zeds Ate My Neighbors.JPG Zombies Ate My Neighbors
This user or group is pretty sure that Zombies Ate their Neighbors.

Quick Q

What's the go with this? Did someone just get his evaluation bid and franekstein it to his original promotion bid? I wasn't around at the time so I'm seeking clarification before I consider giving it a move. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 15:47, 17 June 2009 (BST)

I'm guessing they did... could have even been me (d'oh). Yeah, it should be split off onto it's own page -- boxy talk • teh rulz 13:56 21 June 2009 (BST)
Silly Boxy!!! I fixed it up now. Also, I'm a little confused by this... Is there any reason why Nubzor bolded the I in two of the cases? Is there some symbolism because he self-banned himself in it (reading into this alot). DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 15:19, 21 June 2009 (BST)
There's no I in team! :D -- boxy talk • teh rulz 15:05 22 June 2009 (BST)

lmao, general was literally like 12 back then... little baby --Cyberbob 14:07, 21 June 2009 (BST)

Warning

For your misconduct case. This should have been done already, but that's what I get for thinking another op would do it. ;_; --Mr. Angel, Help needed? 06:28, 15 June 2009 (BST)

I feel 6vmixh1b9.gif is appropriate here ;) --xoxo 09:19, 15 June 2009 (BST)

Haa! :D -- boxy talk • teh rulz 13:12 15 June 2009 (BST)
Well played. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 13:19, 15 June 2009 (BST)
hahahahhaahahshshahahaha hshsdjhahahahhahasjhashah jskahahaquisajjsjq hahhahahahahhhshahshahhaha hjsahjqnzmahhahahahahhaha hhahahahahuhsuahsqihsahhhaha --Cyberbob 14:30, 15 June 2009 (BST)
THAT WAS FUNNY!!!!!! I LUL'D FOR LIKE TEN BILLION INFINITY HOURS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD--Cyberbob 14:30, 15 June 2009 (BST)
One day i will break through your shell bob and your heart will truly be mine.--xoxo 14:50, 15 June 2009 (BST)
You should fry it in a light garlic butter for 15 - 20 mins and serve with chips and beans. -- Cheese 16:32, 15 June 2009 (BST)

The Use of E-tard

Regarding your judgement: I'm allowed to call someone a "retard" but not a "nigger"? You know, that's real discrimination right there, at the favor of skin color and at the cost of disabled people. How do you reason?--Thadeous Oakley 22:44, 7 June 2009 (BST)

Calling someone a retard is making a somewhat legitimate critique on their ability to perform the job they are applying for on A/PM. Shouting NIGGER is nothing but shitting up admin pages, and he probably wouldn't have got a warning this time if he hadn't already plenty of them before for similar things. He doesn't believe the person is black, or he wouldn't be shouting that at them -- boxy talk • teh rulz 23:31 7 June 2009 (BST)
You can't honestly see the difference? Calling someone a retard is a figure of speech, calling someone retarded is a quip about them being mentally deficient. Nigger can't really have a context outside of that, being a nigger. And either way, J3D didn't call anyone nigger. He just spouted it out in bold on the promotions page, as input that could not possibly help the crats at all. That is essentially the part which constitutes vandalism. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 01:14, 8 June 2009 (BST)

AH Historic Re-categorization

May I ask why the old AH page now indicates that Axes High is inactive? I created that page to archive the activities of Axes High before the massive wiki history cleanup... Axes High is still very much active, and I would appreciate a reversion of the article to its prior state.

Thanks, Hardcore Rockabilly, Retired FAE Axes High AH RR RRF

The old AH page already specified that it was inactive. Boxy just got rid of the historical template and added the inactive one. Being a historic group means it is inactive anyway, and because he only made the change on Axes High (Historic), it never affected the new AH to start with. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 08:34, 28 May 2009 (BST)
The historic groups category is for inactive groups who have been voted historic. I edited a lot of pages that weren't supposed to have that template on them. All of the others (hopefully) were inactive. Sorry about that, I've removed the template altogether -- boxy talk • teh rulz 08:34 28 May 2009 (BST)
Hmm. I thought they were different groups. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 08:36, 28 May 2009 (BST)
Ah, they could well be... but I've had enough of UD history for the moment ::) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 08:40 28 May 2009 (BST)

There is no "new" AH, as it's been the same group with a constant (though occasionally small) membership since its creation. If you'd like, I can have Tenk pop on over and back this up... There's the current page and the historic one (having a 3.5 year-old group neccesitates preserving at least a minimum of historic info when a history wipe rolls around). I don't know why it was listed as "historic", as when I created the page it was a subpage of the AH page (Axes High/Historic). Hardcore Rockabilly, Retired FAE Axes High AH RR RRF

That's where it should have stayed. All this time, I've read the historic one thinking it was a separate historical group and your Axes High was just a new-age clone under separate command. Either way is fine though. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 08:49, 28 May 2009 (BST)
If it's their page then it wants to be moved into their group space properly, Axes High/Old for instance. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 08:53, 28 May 2009 (BST)
The page logs don't list any page move from Axes High/Historic, but I've moved it there now -- boxy talk • teh rulz 09:00 28 May 2009 (BST)

BBSC

Ya I am the same person. I have 3 accts on ud, one of em is bonghit420... i had like 4 people in that group BBSC one was true blood... he is my brother in rl.. now he does not play ud n e more and the other two people that asked to join never showed up... so I have made a decision to end that group, plus its name was to stupid. and i am starting a new group called My School... it is going to be a group dedicated to fucking up schools. and anything else lol... But for now i just wanted to get that page down because it was a work in progress that i just did not feel like finishing... to prove i am the same person just email me at scar3crow36@yahoo.com and i will respond that i have lost my password for my other acct on here Jock Horror when i cleared my cookies... so its no big deal..--Jhorror 06:59, 25 May 2009 (BST)

-Well if changing my group to batshit insane is not enough then i dont know what is. I will not change my UD profile just to remove a page... so i guess whenever you do the group clean up thing and never get a responce from me then it will get removed right? Like i have said before, you can email me and i will respond there. You have my word that I am who I say I am.--Jhorror 00:35, 26 May 2009 (BST)

De-categorization

Just wondering why you did this? --Midianian¦T¦DS¦SP¦ 14:07, 16 May 2009 (BST)

I'm trying to unclutter that category, although it looks like that one should go back it. Good to see you're watching... yeah, that's it, I was just checking to see if you were watching ;) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 07:52 17 May 2009 (BST)
I've got over 300 pages on my watchlist. I'm always watching :D. --Midianian¦T¦DS¦SP¦ 11:03, 17 May 2009 (BST)
I have 1,340 on mine, which is why RC is now my watchlist. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 11:07, 17 May 2009 (BST)
My RC shows the last 2500 edits. I just bring up interesting diff links in new tabs at the start of the day, and continue through out it. :) --Mr. Angel, Help needed? 15:00, 17 May 2009 (BST)
How do you manage that? DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 00:39, 18 May 2009 (BST)
Go to my preferences, click the Recent Changes tab, then put in your desired number. 750 will actually do most of the time, if you check at least once every day and a half or so. But on periods of long removal, I tend to amp it up higher.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 00:43, 18 May 2009 (BST)
Lawl. You guys are lightweights. 3,559 pages on watchlist. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:26, 18 May 2009 (BST)
Watchlists are for incompetent and inferior fools who cannot remember to check things at a later date.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 01:30, 18 May 2009 (BST)
Yeah, well what about if you're gone for a few days, what then? --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:41, 18 May 2009 (BST)
Increase the size of the RC list.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 02:24, 18 May 2009 (BST)
It only goes to 500. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 02:30, 18 May 2009 (BST)
Actually, via preferences, you can increase it to a base of 2500. I think with some browser tweaking though, you can increase it up to 5000. Not sure yet. Never had to do it.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 02:37, 18 May 2009 (BST)
So it can, if a bit slowly. But can your "watchlist" remove the boring stuff, leaving only the important things behind? I think not!--  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 02:40, 18 May 2009 (BST)
It's only slow because your internet/computer sucks. And also, it can, because my brain is notorious for not caring about things that aren't captivating. Also, my watchlist is now empty, because I cleared it and decided to stop adding everything I edit to it. Now, it's just going to be unused.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 02:43, 18 May 2009 (BST)
Anything that takes longer than a second to load is too long for me. Have it your way, heretic! ;P--  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 02:47, 18 May 2009 (BST)
You speak to me of heresy? You who has unleashed dozens of distorted copies of our glorious simulation? It is YOU who conducts heresy!--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 03:11, 18 May 2009 (BST)

Personal details

and whose personal details have I posted on this wiki? --Roorgh 22:59, 28 April 2009 (BST)

These. Even if it was just bullshit its still not on. Behave or you'll get banned. -- Cheese 23:16, 28 April 2009 (BST)
Sorry, but I don't understand; may be the lack of sleep. Was he joking, like: "hey, I bet you're 40 and single" or he was seriously saying: "hey, I know you and you are 40 and single"? --Janus talk 23:33, 28 April 2009 (BST)
Oh, it's nonsense. Then, why the warning? --Janus talk 23:35, 28 April 2009 (BST)
I wasn't even attempting to say "I bet you're 40 and single" Janus. I have no idea who Linkedthewindow is. It was a totally stupid post in response to his "I think I may regret this..." comment on his earlier post. Stupid as in clearly a 3 minute fabrication, 1 of those minutes to google the SSN format as I claimed he was from the US. I was having a joke with Linkedthewindow on a talk page, and who is yet to tell me that he found this distasteful. --Roorgh 23:45, 28 April 2009 (BST)
Tasteful doesn't equal good faith. But like most people, I didn't even know this was in reference to Linkthewindow... The details were so wrong I thought it was about Callista. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 01:42, 29 April 2009 (BST)

Karek Demotion

UDWiki:Administration/Demotions#Karek
Any chance you could archive it? (I've seen that only 'crats have ever edited the archive.) Linkthewindow  Talk  07:08, 25 April 2009 (BST)

Done, but I'm sure no-one would mind if you'd have done it after so long -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:48 25 April 2009 (BST)

UDWiki:Administration/Bureaucrat Promotions/February 2009. Scheduled Protection, I noticed. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 13:22, 1 May 2009 (BST)

Done. Linkthewindow  Talk  13:39, 1 May 2009 (BST)

A/SD

Pardon my idiocy on the Speedy Deletions page on the Scheduled Deletions. Until that point they were something I didn't totally understand, hence the oversized lists etc. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 11:56, 2 April 2009 (BST)

DDR's Bid

Thoughts? I personally think that it's a bit too soon for this "new DDR" to be promoted. If he can show that he's reformed for good, maybe, but if he goes right back to being an immature arsehead then we'd be pretty stuck to boot him out, eh?--Suicidal Angel, Help needed? 21:36, 31 March 2009 (BST)

I, of course, agree -- boxy talk • teh rulz 12:36 2 April 2009 (BST)
Demotion's easier to obtain than you think. Just get 50% of the active sysops to agree and run the case through when DDR's inactive and his mate who would usually defend him in his absence has been unreasonably banned for 48 hours.--xoxo 03:34, 1 April 2009 (BST)
you just lost the right to call anyone bitter ever again. --Cyberbob 07:42, 1 April 2009 (BST)
You shouldn't have been promoted in the first place. Let's learn from that mistake. --– Nubis NWO 11:08, 1 April 2009 (BST)

User:Boxy/Sandbox/Unused Images

Would it be okay if I deleted the code using the three deleted images in that gallery? It is permanently keeping Special:Uncategorizedimages from being pretty. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 00:32, 31 March 2009 (BST)

Really? You think you can rid us of the "Ghost images"? --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 21:39, 31 March 2009 (BST)
By god, I'm gonna try! DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 03:39, 1 April 2009 (BST)

26 Mar 09

Nip

Hey Boxy. I've deleted the image. Sorry, didn't realize it would cause any offense. Thanks for letting me know. --Lady Clitoria 13:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

PS - It wasn't porn!!! --Lady Clitoria 20:48, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your co-operation -- boxy talk • teh rulz 09:57 28 March 2009 (BST)
you mean input, right?--xoxo 14:41, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
It was a poorly made image with exposed nipples. It needed to go for many reasons. The replacement looks better and covers the nipples. I think it is fine.--– Nubis NWO 14:53, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
The replacement was just as poorly made! But yeah, my nips are now hidden. --Lady Clitoria 14:56, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
YOUR nipples eh? So that was you? DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 06:10, 29 March 2009 (BST)

Category:Human Groups

I wanna get rid of this category and move all pages manually to Category:Survivor Groups. If I list all the protected pages that need moving, would you be able to change them over for me? DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 23:15, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Nuerotoxic2213

My Name is Nuerotoxic2213, and i have noticed that someone has vandalized one of my images on the Ackland Mall Security Page. now someone has been going all over the air-waves in game slandering us , which is fine, but vandalism on the wiki is another story. since i am not "wiki" literate enough to figure this out, was wondering if you could help me. the image in question is here http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Image:Ams.jpg

as far as i can tell it was Lady Clitoria who vandalized the image since before hand it was only Officer Otep back in 2006 who had touched the image. i tried to click on the (rev) thing next to the names and such but like i said, "wiki" illiterate. Nuerotoxic2213 20:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Talked to the user about it. Should be good, don't think its VB worthy, it was just a newbie mistake. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 23:15, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Nuerotoxic2213 --- those wiki revisions were from ZOLAM, (Lady C is my wiki account). You said it was okay to amend. This wasn't vandalism. Let me know which badge you want and I'll amend as you wish. Sorry about the confusion. I thought you would've realized when we put the new map up, as that was also by Lady C. ---- ZOLAM (--Lady Clitoria 06:52, 12 March 2009 (UTC))

Recruitment Ad Page Maintenance

Sorry to bother you, but I think I ought to inform you that all youknowwhat may be about to break loose. I informed DK13 on their talk page that I had hidden their ad as their image is too large. They (rather politely) responded tell me that their ad was supposed to have been approved as is. I can only presume that they were referring to the guideline changes that many of us were discussing on the Recruitment Ad talk page and which now seem to have stalled. I hid the ad again this morning and explained my reason for doing so on their talk page. It is under the Recruitment Ad heading at the bottom of the page. I was polite, as well, but I sense that this could quickly become an issue.--Lois talk 10MFH 12:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Wanyao

So, since he finally managed to let us know of his acceptance on the bid, what do you think we should do? I think we don't need to let it go on for more than 2-3 more days before we make a decision, plenty of time for him to make replies to comments and stuffs. Sound good to you? Or should we consider his acceptance as the actual start of the Com. rev. part of the bid, and give him two more weeks?--Suicidal Angel, Help needed? 01:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Tell me again why he should be granted an exception to the two week rule? The initial period ended before he posted. I smell yet another foregone conclusion... --Cyberbob 07:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
You know you're more like iscariot then you realise.--xoxo 11:41, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
hurf durf wikistalking --Cyberbob 13:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
durf hurf watchlist?--xoxo 23:41, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I think, given how long it went before he accepted, that (at the very least) a note should be left on the main page to say that he has now accepted the nomination and opinion is still being asked. I think he deserves the promotion but not until he shows evidence that he is around enough to make promotion worthwhile... a number of others seem to feel similarly and the early vouchers may reconsider in light of a 2+ week absence, letting the whole thing run an extra week seems like a fairer alternative than just starting over.--Honestmistake 13:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought he made it pretty clear that he won't be active enough to justify promoting him. Any further "clarification" or "explanation" would just be backpedalling. --Cyberbob 13:26, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Well he says he will not be as active as he was... thing is though, he seemed to be active about 8 hours a day and that can't be healthy (or good for continued employment prospects) If I could be sure that his reduced activity would still see him checking in most days and dedicating a good few hours a week being constructive he would have my vouch now, as is though i would like a month or so to judge before he puts himself forwards.--Honestmistake 21:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Alrighty then, sorry I've been absent, I was in a play, and we just finished performing, and then tearing everything down yesterday. I'll take a look again and let you know later tonight, alright with you? Again, sorry for my absence. Crunch time and all, I'm sure you understand right?--Suicidal Angel, Help needed? 20:05, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Also, does my talk page look that bad? It surprisingly relaxes my eyes and doesn't hurt them like this blinding white background all over the wiki. :/ --Suicidal Angel, Help needed? 20:07, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

WOOT's Bid

I'm just going to go ahead and call it failed, as it's apparent the community doesn't think he needs the status. If you disagree, then I'm sorry for just going ahead, but I didn't think there'd be anyway you'd think he deserves it right now.--Suicidal Angel, Help needed? 01:22, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Good idea -- boxy talk • teh rulz 07:53 5 March 2009 (BST)
T_T --/~Rakuen~\Talk Domo.gif I Still Love Grim 22:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Links Sysop Bid

Going to decide on it?--RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 00:38, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

So, I suppose it's that time to talk about the candidate. What are your thoughts?--Suicidal Angel, Help needed? 00:46, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

You're new. You're supposed to flip a coin. What's this about "thoughts"? :P --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 00:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Gotta make it look like we actually try and discuss the candidates, right?--Suicidal Angel, Help needed? 01:14, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Oh come ON!!! Remember Grim? ;D DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 01:30, 26 May 2009 (BST)
I'm all for Link's promotion. The major reason for against votes seems to be that he isn't keen to get involved in A/VB drama. I have no problem with promoting people who want to steer clear of A/VB unless it's cut and dried. I expect any sysop to deal with obvious vandalism, but don't mind if they keep out of the borderline cases unless they have strong views, and a good understanding of policy/precedence relevant to the case. Basically, I can't fault Links dedication to the smooth running of the wiki. Pure good faith editor, who has shown a willingness to work in areas that would benefit from the added sysop abilities -- boxy talk • teh rulz 14:48 2 March 2009 (BST)
Alrighty then, I guess he's a sysops now, as that's about what I was thinking. I really do not want him jumping into VB if he can't make a decision, but I'm pretty sure he's smart enough to realize "LOL U SUCK" being spammed on a group page is vandalism. Would you like to do the honors, or shall I?--Suicidal Angel, Help needed? 00:00, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

There's another one

User:DangerReportTimekeeperBot. Could you demote it accordingly? Thanks. -- User:The Rooster RoosterDragon User talk:The Rooster 20:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks for letting us know -- boxy talk • teh rulz 14:49 2 March 2009 (BST)

Thanks

Oh ok, thanks, I didn't realize how this all worked.--OmarJXII 03:37, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Omar

A/D#Zombykiller_user_page

Can I create a redirect then? --Janus talk 14:35, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

From your link, it should be obvious that I think that it depends on the situation... so explain, and I will give an opinion -- boxy talk • teh rulz 22:48 27 February 2009 (BST)
Zombykiller/Bhuwannabe posted a deletion request. I contacted him by pm and he said that he'd like to keep his old user page as redirect to his new one. Question: Can I recreate the page as a redirect? --Janus talk 14:07, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
*pokes* --Janus talk 17:32, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

For some reason...

Anywho, you may or may not know I run Project NecroWatch. I try to keep new guys from making mistakes, but every now and then it happens with scan images. One such mistake is the BuildingBuildingNecronet.png. As it's no longer linked to anything I figured it would get cleaned up eventually, but just today another person posting a scan mistakenly linked to it instead of their own scan image. I blame my semi-confusing template, which becomes an issue when users are switching from the "no current scan" static GIF to their new PNG. Anywho, if possible, would you please delete this image for me in order to avoid any further misunderstandings of this nature? I was going to post this request under speedy deletions... and while it has been a while... but those requests don't seem to include reasons for an image deletion. Let me know. --Mobius 17:26, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

It can go through speedydeletions as a crit 1 if you can show where it is duplicated elsewhere on the wiki. It's too new for me to delete on sight though. Best to go through A/SD -- boxy talk • teh rulz 01:15 23 February 2009 (BST)

Can we keep him Uncle Boxy?

Plz? =( -- Cheese 19:19, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

And can we have this one too? =( -- Cheese 10:36, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Sure. You have to take them for walkies, daily, though! :P
Seriously though, Nubis' status has been confirmed, and I have posted on Karek's talk page, asking if he wants to remain a sysop. Unless Karek says that he wants a demotion, I agree that both should remain sysops -- boxy talk • teh rulz 14:05 21 February 2009 (BST)

I agree. Karek's done a damn good job while he was a Sysop, no point in removing his powers until he's sure he wants to leave.--Suicidal Angel, Help needed? 13:55, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! If I mess on the carpet... uh, rub Karek's nose in it. It's the only way I will learn! --– Nubis NWO 16:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Unsuccessful Promotions

On the category page for archived unsuccessful promo bids, Jerrel Yokotory's bid is under U for the title of the page, not J for his user name. Is there a way to change it to look like all the others? --Pestolence(talk) 02:17, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

It's a result of not specifying the category within the code. To categorise correctly one must not just add a [[Category:Whatever]], but must put the desired title within as so [[Category:Whatever|Jerrel Yokotory]] otherwise it defaults to the category title, or page title, I can't remember. Jerrel's promotion bid should not have been archived, if Nubis wishes to use precedent in regards to his own bid he must also abide by the precedent set by Xela's bid, but do you really think our sysop team will do that? -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:41, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
It defaults to the full page title. Precedent shouldn't always be followed, though I do think it should've been one of the crats to archive it. --Midianian¦T¦DS¦SP¦ 10:31, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Should be fixed now -- boxy talk • teh rulz 12:40 16 February 2009 (BST)
Thanks, Boxy. Some of us have OCD about that kind of thing :) --Pestolence(talk) 00:37, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Zink

Since he's cleared his page, here's my comment, with the same amount of sarcasm. :P

I'm sorry, I could have sworn that this comment:

Quote: Cheese "I give up trying to get decent diffs. All you need to do is just compare the contribs. They all match up. Its like he's talking to himself in places. I've also come across two more alts (User:Zink and User:Zinkthekiller and the most telling page of all User:Ahrimmagicks/Zinkthereviver. -- Cheese WTF!RandomSysOp? 00:05, 4 July 2008 (BST) "

had shown that Zink was a known sockpuppet of Zinker, and would have been banned when you said you were banning all his known alts. My bad, I guess I was thrown off by those comments that are apparently not that confusing. Sorry for wasting your time.

Anywho, previous sarcasm aside, on the archive of that case, it links to the current Zink, which would mean he had made the account back then. The owner just hadn't made any edits to confirm it. So shouldn't your comment be saying something about banning an account that hasn't done anything yet instead? Maybe you should read up before you try to +1 me next time, eh? :) --BFFs +SA+NSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSAN 4 EVA!!! 00:16, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

So it was, sorry about that. Cant have used the same IP, or had any zinker-like edits at the time. Anyway, next piece of vandalism will probably see him gone for good -- boxy talk • teh rulz 03:42 13 February 2009 (BST)
Oh, its no problem boxy. Sorry about the large amounts of sarcasm in it, but you called me numbnuts for no reason that time. :'( --Suicidal Angel, Help needed? 12:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protection

No one else seems interested, and I know why. But you suggested it, so I'd be great if you checked it, please. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 03:38, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

?

This and User:VRastignac and this? --Janus talk 14:43, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Looks like Matteusz has created another account, but still doesn't get how to link to an actual user page. PK is an ironically n00bish group -- boxy talk • teh rulz 14:57 10 February 2009 (BST)
Ehe, ok. Though Matt's user contributions don't show he created the old version of User:VRastignac. Or am I missing it? :| --Janus talk 15:12, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
History of old page -- boxy talk • teh rulz 15:15 10 February 2009 (BST)
Oh, I've just realised that history is moved along with the page. lol. --Janus talk 15:19, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Whatcha' doin'?

The guys over at the Dulston Alliance wanted me to ask what Dead Animal was up to in the Pilton Building. I told them to cool their trigger fingers because last I heard you weren't exactly a death cultist and that doesn't seem to be a policy stated anywhere on the Dead Animals wikipage, or Redux. Just your rivalry with the Friends of the Featherstone Library. Do you play dual nature, or were you combat revived and are now just hanging around a bit? Let me know, or not. Thanks. --Mobius 20:37, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

He does tend to take it out on generators in NT buildings, but yeah, sticks to offing the FotFL guys mostly, these days. He does the dual nature thing, but only when supporting a rot revive point... there's a prime location for one on the Dulston/Rhodenbank boundary that he stumbled upon too, although I don't hold out much hope for the residents supporting such a facility -- boxy talk • teh rulz 14:37 9 February 2009 (BST)
I would have to agree with you on that one. The concept of "Rot Revive Clinics" are about as foreign a concept to northeast locals as is the idea of real "mall tactics". That's why the Dulston Alliance doesn't see the mall as worth saving, not enough people know how to defend it to keep it. For now I'll let the Alliance know that you're not a death cultist, but if you get spotted/reported for GKing you'll still end up on the Black List. Just a friendly FYI. Oh, and if you want something to do as a survivor, restore Troubridge Cinema and/or St.Barbara's Church. I don't understand why the zombies keep messing with my "Night of the Living Dead" stuff. ;) --Mobius 19:51, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Well, one of the guys came along and sentenced me to death, indirectly, by repairing the ruin I was hiding in. Didn't take my zombie brothers long to find me after that. But it's alright, I have a purpose again, debarricading a NT, destroying it's genny, and calling the ferals in for a feed. Things are as they should be, again ;) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:09 10 February 2009 (BST)
No such thing. You're just making it impossible for it to ever live period, the meta is always what defends the mall, the rest is just a distraction. --Karekmaps?! 01:35, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

CE

areyou sure the crat elections spose to start? I haven't looked into it at all but this discussion would suggest its another 2 weeks til its due...--xoxo 01:12, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

"After 3 months with no elections on a bureaucrat position, an election is called for the bureaucrat position longest without an election."
The last election finished on 4 December 2008, therefore the next on would be due on the 4th of March (barring resignation or crat inactivity). As you can see from this example, where the June crat election ended on the 22nd of June and was followed by one starting on the 23rd of September -- boxy talk • teh rulz 03:25 8 February 2009 (BST)
okay i'm totally lost. You just said the 4th of march which is like 3 weeks away...--xoxo 03:56, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
I don't think I can make it any clearer... yes, 3 or 4 weeks away -- boxy talk • teh rulz 04:08 8 February 2009 (BST)
But a new ones started...unless you're saying it won't end until march the 4th? --xoxo 04:43, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Oh, that's what you're getting at. No. I meant that the one that cheese just started didn't need to be done until March 4 -- boxy talk • teh rulz 04:51 8 February 2009 (BST)

Hey

My bad on Promo, I thought you made a mistake. I didn't know that you purposely put BFF instead of Angel.--BFFs +SA+NSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSAN 4 EVA!!! 00:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

honestmistake

While grateful for your support in the promotion bid I feel I really should point out that I simply do not have the skills or patience to do many of the technical functions that a sysop normally does. This is not to say that I cannot and will not learn enough to help out, rather to point out that I currently have no clue as to how they work. If you were voting for me because you trust my judgement on issues like A/VB and Misconduct then thank you… if you think I can be trusted to maintain the wiki infrastructure then please change your vote to abstain because I am crap at editing stuff let alone fixing other folks mistakes.--Honestmistake 14:03, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

lolwut? It's not really that hard...--xoxo 23:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Just withdraw the bid if you doubt your ability to do the job -- boxy talk • teh rulz 02:18 4 February 2009 (BST)
I think it's more a bizarre form of sucking up, but i must say i'm rather confused as to the motive...maybe trying to get get a/vb-ed ala woot? --xoxo 06:57, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Its more a case of making sure that no one is under any illusions as to my technical know how. Boxy is probably already aware as he has fixed a few of my errors over the years but as I sent this to all who "Vouched" for me I thought it best to be consistent and include Boxy too. As for "sucking up"... that would make sense only if I really wanted the promotion and would probably be better done by targetting those who abstained. I am more than willing to accept promotion and be useful if people think I can be (hell i might even enjoy it?) but not getting it really will not send me into a spiral of bitterness like it did Bob. --Honestmistake 13:52, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Okay fair enough. I just think technical know-how isn't really a criterion for sysopship. As long as you can delete a page and follow some red tape in the process, it's just the same as being a normal user. Oh, aside from being able to place little apostrophes around your decisions on a/m and a/vb cases. --xoxo 00:05, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Probably should be but only for users who want to edit protected templates, which most don't. --Karekmaps?! 02:50, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

plz to be

strikan my vandal escalation? --Cyberbob 02:00, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Good enough for you?--Suicidal Angel - Help needed? 02:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

1 Feb 09

Aren't physical threats bannable on this wiki?

I can't find the policy which covers it, though. I bring this up in regards to this this. Darkmagic (it's him, right?) made two such comments... To be honest, I'm a little miffed that hagnat took the liberty of letting him off the hook. He ought not to have done so, imo, b/c I thought we were zero tolerance on that kind of shit. Especially since he did it twice and there's no way it could be taken as "sarcastic".... Are our hands tied now, then? In any case, any thoughts on how one should proceed with something like this, whether hag's imnsho non-standard warning sticks or not? Thanks. --WanYao 20:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

If Iscariot feels threatened by it, and wants to report it, I'd warn him for it, given he's made it clear it's supposed to be a R/L threat. But really, it's hard to take such bullshit seriously -- boxy talk • teh rulz 01:08 2 February 2009 (BST)
Stop being a whiny cunt WanYao, before I find you irl, rip your throat out, and shit down your neck--/~Rakuen~\Talk Domo.gif I Still Love Grim 23:16, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
:D Only case i can think of though wan was nick saying this guy should watch his back. He didn't get any punishment although it served up a small helping of drama...--xoxo 00:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Boxman!

What do you reckon? I'm not entirely sure about this one. =p -- Cheese 18:25, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I think it's pretty clear that the community is happy to have him as a sysop, and rightly so, seeing as the only major problems he's caused are far in the past. BTW, please don't archive the bid straight away. Make your ruling, and leave it for a few days so that it's easy for people to find out what happened rather than having to navigate through the archives (not knowing which category it may have went in) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 00:13 29 January 2009 (BST)

Entirely Angry

I still don't agree, but meh. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 10:39, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I remember when Pescodcide/Dullstown used to be constantly green, and we'd regularly break into buildings, killing survivors here and there. But I wouldn't describe the place as anything but safe, because we could all bank on getting a headshot, inside or out, within the hour, and the survivors a revive as soon as they stood up :) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:45 27 January 2009 (BST)
I always find it boils down to your definition of a group of zombies. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 15:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Warm, Comfy Socks

I think the wiki martyr case is a closed deal, so I'm not going to add anything else. I think my view of sockpuppets is best demonstrated by this template. --ZsL 01:30, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Promotion Bid

Well, they've had two weeks now. What do you think? Yay or nay? -- Cheese 14:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

It's a pretty clear decision, community supportwise, I think. His contributions in the admin area have been fine, it's just that they've been limited to one section, speedy/deletions. I'd like to see his opinions in the policy discussion area, on a wider range before he goes further -- boxy talk • teh rulz 07:24 20 January 2009 (BST)
That's pretty much what I was thinking. I'll do the shifting on A/PM now. -- Cheese 10:54, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

job well done

I was just looking for an active sysop to look at "user: wiki martyr" when I saw you had already gotten him. Funny but obviously a No-No. --Honestmistake 09:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Warning stuff

So... Im I "unwarned" :D? All did was "revert" my sig to my original signing when I posted. There were too many intermediate versions to just undo Leroys changes. --Obi + Talk!|TZH|MDK 20:07, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Show me the diff comparison where you originally changed all those sigs to what you say you've reverted them back to, and we'll talk -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:02 15 January 2009 (BST)
These are my original "posts" -> [1],[2],[3] then leroy did this so I changed them back to my original signing. --Obi + Talk!|TZH|MDK 12:26, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
The page's history, as you can see it has a lot of intermediate versions. --Obi + Talk!|TZH|MDK 12:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Kempsterbank

Because I had first hand information, as per my report on the suburb page. There is an active zombie group of above 10. Even the suburb's own news page admits there's a "hot spot" of zombie activity. Good enough? --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 09:22, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. I want to get a feel for how reliable the EMRs are, and having a suburb show up as no standing zombies, and hours later be classified as moderately dangerous is an anomaly :P -- boxy talk • teh rulz 12:10 9 January 2009 (BST)
Yeah I was in a hurry and should have changed it and recorded why in the comments box. I was just being lazy! --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 13:41, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Undeletions?

Sorry, I don't know wiki well, and I couldn't find an email or anything to request the undeletion of an old - and rather historical - police station from M-ville. A link to the deletion request in question. - Umm, I'm not sure, sorry.  :-/ A reason for undeletion. This should be short and to the point. - I'm assuming because it hadn't been updated in quite some time... A signed datestamp.

It was: http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Brewer_Street_Police_Dept < Brewer Street PD was one of two main operation bases for the humans/survivors working with the M-ville PD - Monroeville Police Department - which was, if not the, among the most powerful and organized survivor groups back then. It would be greatly appreciated if it could be undeleted for historical references. Hopefully I'm talking to the right guy, like I said I don't know wiki well, so if you could forward it on to the right place if this isn't the right place to request, I'd greatly appreciate it.

Thanks! - ChiefyMan 05:25, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

It's been moved to Brewer Street Police Department (Monroeville) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 05:36 9 January 2009 (BST)

Template Question

I'm trying to figure out how to display the month in which a page was last modified in named form. I know {{REVISIONMONTH}} exists, but it displays the month in numeric form. This would work, but having both a date and month expressed numerically can be confusing, as their positions are interchangeable in common usage. Anyway, I tried to create a template {{REVISIONMONTHNAME}} by using code from wikipedia and {{REVISIONMONTH}}. This has failed and I can't figure out how to get it to work. Any suggestions or help would be much appreciated. --Zarneverfike 07:44, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

What do you need it for? The revision date is at the bottom of pages for me, already. For example, "This page has been accessed 15,589 times. This page was last modified 07:44, January 6, 2009" is at the bottom of this page -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:26 6 January 2009 (BST)
I wanted to use it in another template: {{Mobile Phone Mast Coverage}}, based on the Monroeville and Borehamwood population templates. I wanted to include a last revised date on the template, so it would be convenient to see how current the network coverage number was. Using the revision templates would make updating the mobile coverage template slightly easier, as only the % number would have to be updated. Like I said, {{REVISIONMONTH}} would suffice, but I think having the month in named form is potentially less confusing, and also, in my opinion, looks better. I tried playing around with the {{REVISIONMONTHNAME}} template a bit, but its above my wiki editing skill level. Oh, and yes, if templates created for this little project fail / aren't used a speedy deletion will be their ultimate fate. --Zarneverfike 22:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
I'd guess that the problem is that we don't have parser functions installed in this wiki (I think). Pity really, because I could use it in one of my projects -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:03 7 January 2009 (BST)
I think I may actually have gotten it to work. Turns out {{switch}} was used prior to parser functions on wikipedia, and was a valid template here. Anyway, I'm almost certain {{REVISIONMONTHNAME}} works properly now (though I guess I won't know for certain until February.) Anyway, thanks for pointing me in the right direction. Also, I'll submit the two unused templates created in the process: {{MONTHNAME}} and {{MONTHNUMBER}} to A/SD. Thank you again for your help. --Zarneverfike 11:01, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Edit: Given further thought, {{REVISIONMONTHNAME}} is useless, as it would only display when it was last revised. Its code is now directly included in the mobile coverage template I was working on. {{REVISIONMONTHNAME}} will join its cousins in the speedy deletion queue. Thanks anyway for the help though. --Zarneverfike 11:17, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
You might also want to put that failed template up for A/SD by the way. Unless you can change it over to something useful or that works.--– Nubis NWO 11:32, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


I made something to this effect in ProjDev. Just haven't quite bothered finishing it yet. Depending on how soon it's needed and how major a part of the project it is I could always fast track it for you.--Karekmaps?! 06:46, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, it ended up working, but not as I intended. All the revision templates called the final page they were included on, and not the phone mast template. It would be slightly preferable if I could figure out how to make them work how I want them. In the mean time, I've resorted to tildes (which work fine, but are an extra step for anyone updating the template, and produce a more precise, but less aesthetically pleasing result.) --Zarneverfike 13:58, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


Questionf

Are you a girl?--Thari TжFedCom is BFI! 06:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

No. If I was I wouldn't be interested either :p -- boxy talk • teh rulz 07:00 6 January 2009 (BST)
Are you sure?--Thari TжFedCom is BFI! 07:05, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Hmmm, I guess that depends... are you a girl? -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:29 6 January 2009 (BST)
Silly boxy. There are no girls on the internet. Why do you think you answered no?-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 12:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Info Locations

Why this and this? I was wondering, can we do redirects for categories (for this problem)? For example, redirect 'Category:Police Dept' to 'Category:Police Department? --Janus talk 21:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

No, redirects don't put the pages into the other category -- boxy talk • teh rulz 07:01 6 January 2009 (BST)
I see. What was the problem with the old system? --Janus talk 14:16, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

The DRAMA!

Wow, I've only been gone since November and it seems in that time span the whole place has gone to hell! J3d got demoted and A/VB is full of trolling! The whole place is falling apart. How did it happen so quick?--SirArgo Talk 06:57, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Two months is a long time on teh interwebs -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:14 5 January 2009 (BST)

No more trolling than is usually done. :) -- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 11:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Signing

Thanks, are you refering to anything specific?--Captain Rickety 00:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Not really. I was going through your contributions to see what was going on when you broke the STARS redirects, and noticed that a lot of your talk page contributions weren't signed. It makes it very hard to work out who said what unless you sign (and timestamp) your talk page posts -- boxy talk • teh rulz 00:23 5 January 2009 (BST)

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 when... [snip]... acting in accordance with approved policies." -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:48 3 January 2009 (BST)
Did you log your edit of that protected policy page on any admin page for oversight? -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 11:05, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
No, but thanks for watching my back. Does this mean we're friends now, and I can use your talk page too ;) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 12:13 3 January 2009 (BST)
So let me get this right, you decided to alter a policy voted in by the community and not note this edit anywhere so that the community or another sysop could exercise oversight or voice some sort of concern? Yes, of course you may post on my talk page, provided you have edited this page in the same way as Gnome and every other unfit sysop. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 12:18, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
If it was an edit that changed the meaning of the policy in any way whatsoever I would bother, but seeing it was a simple grammar edit (taking out a couple of superfluous "when"s), it's a totally good faith edit -- boxy talk • teh rulz 12:26 3 January 2009 (BST)
As is proven by this user's question, it does change the meaning of the policy, because the policy said something completely different. I don't care if you believed (which I doubt) that your edit was good faith, the fact is you edited a protected page without logging the change. You broke the guidelines, that same as Cheese was misconducted for. Going to go to A/M and write up your own case for review? Didn't think so, there's your "good faith". -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 12:32, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Making a policy easier to understand by removing the excess padding around the important bits is not bad faith. In fact, most of the policies we have are very long-winded and could probably be summarised in about 4 or 5 bullet points. -- Cheese 12:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
As was proven by the original user, it was a complete change of the written meaning of the policy. If you could even comprehend the precedence this sets.... -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 12:45, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Oh noes!1!!!1!!!1!!eleventyone!!1!!0!"2B!!1 =( I r 2 st00p1d 2 reed Engl15h? Seriously, fuck off. Don't sit there and attempt to say I'm thick. That is not on. -- Cheese 12:52, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
The edit in question -- boxy talk • teh rulz 13:02 3 January 2009 (BST)
Which is now logged, even thought there is little need for grammar edits to be so logged -- boxy talk • teh rulz 13:04 3 January 2009 (BST)


I wonder when you guys will realize that he doesn't actually have a point and realizes it. He's just a troll, stop the feeding.--Karekmaps?! 17:44, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Is the amusement he creates as a troll greater than the frustration he generates as one? I lean toward No, but some of you have more tolerance than I do. Is he really a troll we should seriously look into? I already have my answer (and case) ready, but I thought I would get a feel for the general opinion.--– Nubis NWO 06:04, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
No, I am not a troll, it was a serious question, and sorry Boxy for putting my question at the bottom of the talk page. I read the template at the top and thought it implied I should press the '+'. Sorry. And thanks. Liberty 00:29, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
I doubt they're talking about you, Liberty, but rather Iscariot -- boxy talk • teh rulz 00:31 5 January 2009 (BST)
And thats the second paragraph I've totally read wrong infront of you guys. You must all think I'm blind. Pardon me Liberty 12:39, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

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 talk • teh 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 oʇ 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 talk • teh 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 oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 15:01, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Weird eh? Dunno, can't help -- boxy talk • teh 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 oʇ 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 oʇ 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 oʇ 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)
Firefox 2 is teh awesome. Firefox 3 is teh suxxor. (i refused to move to ff3) --People's Commissar Hagnat talk mod 00:34, 5 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 oʇ 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 oʇ 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 oʇ 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh rulz 11:53 29 December 2008 (BST)

28 Dec 08

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 talk • teh 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)
The wiki is srs business hey bawb ^.^--CyberRead240 04:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
ouch.--xoxo 04:45, 4 January 2009 (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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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)
So Halo 3 is THAT fun is it? We just might have to give that a try!--CyberRead240 04:56, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Good job coming up with the quickfire comeback there, cuntload. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 07:17, 4 January 2009 (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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 (talk • contribs) 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 oʇ 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 oʇ 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 oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 13:23, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Just read back -- boxy talk • teh 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 oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 13:34, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

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

21 Nov 08

wow; what happend

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

He got sick of our putting up with our obvious inferiority -- boxy talk • teh 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 talk • teh rulz 09:03 21 November 2008 (BST)

Spoilsport

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

Ja, I know :) -- boxy talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • i 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 talk • i 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 talk • i 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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 talk • teh 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)

Archives

Location Editing

Locations talk archive:

Suggestions

Suggestion talk archive:

Moderation

Moderation talk archive

Editing teh Wiki

Editing talk archive:

General Talk

General talk archive:

Radio Edit

The Mad Craskers have had 26.07 as their dedicated frequency for five years. As such, they get to share it with the suburbs or the suburbs have to move.--Justinbronze 03:56, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=User_talk:Boxy&oldid=1663250"