UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2010 05: Difference between revisions

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 4: Line 4:
</noinclude>
</noinclude>
==[[UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2010 05|May 2010]]==
==[[UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2010 05|May 2010]]==
===[[User:Cornholioo]]===
{{vndl|Cornholioo}}{{verdict}}
Breaking arbies ruling [[UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Cornholioo_vs_Misanthropy#Ruling|here]] preventing him to make arbies cases without neutral arbitrater Yonnua's go-ahead. Said case which breached ruling is [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=UDWiki%3AAdministration%2FArbitration&diff=1705557&oldid=1705086 here].
Before anyone suspects that I actually baited Cornholioo into this, I don't bait users into A/VB cases and honestly, I actually forgot the ruling myself until Spiderzed mentioned it to Yonnua.
But really. Hey Cornholioo, you were right, sure looks like you won in this one.
You [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration&diff=1705556&oldid=1705555 always] win.--{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 15:38, 7 May 2010 (BST)


=== [[User:The_Colonel]] ===
=== [[User:The_Colonel]] ===

Revision as of 14:38, 7 May 2010


Administration Services

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

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

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

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

Guidelines for Vandalism Reporting

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

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

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

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

Before Submitting a Report

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


Vandalism Report Space

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



Spambots

Spambots are to be reported on this page. New reports should be added to the top. Reports may be purged after one week.

There were a bunch of spambit-looking account creations on the 17th, these are the live ones at present.

May 2010

User:Cornholioo

Cornholioo (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Breaking arbies ruling here preventing him to make arbies cases without neutral arbitrater Yonnua's go-ahead. Said case which breached ruling is here.

Before anyone suspects that I actually baited Cornholioo into this, I don't bait users into A/VB cases and honestly, I actually forgot the ruling myself until Spiderzed mentioned it to Yonnua.

But really. Hey Cornholioo, you were right, sure looks like you won in this one.

You always win.--

15:38, 7 May 2010 (BST)

User:The_Colonel

The Colonel (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Posting on my talk page after told not to.

To support this I want to bring this. White regards, CORNHLIOO REMEMBER WHAT THE FIGHT IS FOR 14/88!!! 9:30, 7 May 2010 (BST)

Administration, Approved Policies, Administration Guidelines, a search for the word "harassment".
There, go look through those, and let me know when you can tell me what rule he supposedly broke. I know Ross may have said one thing, but I cordially disagree with his statement since I can't find anything to back up the idea of "harassment" being vandalism. We've already told you that this is Not Vandalism several times, and it shouldn't need to be repeated. When it comes to harassment as an official matter, sysops aren't allowed to bully around other users by using their status as a badge, which doesn't apply to the people listed on your page, and "harassment of any user through administration pages may result in vandal escalations," which seems as if it might apply soon if you keep this up. Aichon 10:08, 7 May 2010 (BST)

Not vandalism - do you see a pattern forming here, Corni? Go to arbitration and show reason why they should be banned from your page. Telling you not to spam recent changes is not harassment, it's what your talk page is for, so that people can contact you. Banning everyone who says something you don't want to hear is not reasonable (try not being a douchebag instead) -- boxy talkteh rulz 09:44 7 May 2010 (BST)

As boxy. There's a surprise. Theres at least two sysops telling you that it may be a case. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 10:23, 7 May 2010 (BST)
... and a third one that actually told me to get these people to vandal banning. Rings any bells Rosslessness? --CORNHLIOO REMEMBER WHAT THE FIGHT IS FOR 14/88!!! 12:18, 7 May 2010 (BST)

User:Spiderzed

Spiderzed (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Posting on my talk page after told not to. White regards,Cornholioo 17:16, 2 May 2010 (BST)

I have only to add the following: I'm aware of not being welcome on that talk page. For that reason, I've kept my comment short, to the point, factual, and have done it in good faith (to point out an oversight I assumed Cornholioo had at that time). That being said, I'll gladly receive an official warning if the sys-ops deem that this hasn't been sufficient reason and damage control. --Spiderzed 17:32, 2 May 2010 (BST)
Just avoid it entirely. We're coming to get you, Barbara 17:33, 2 May 2010 (BST)

Vandalism. Will you guys all just not do things any more? We're coming to get you, Barbara 17:30, 2 May 2010 (BST)

Fuck it, Acorn makes sense, Not Vandalism. We're coming to get you, Barbara 20:08, 2 May 2010 (BST)

Not Vandalism - As we explained last time this came up with Cornholioo, until it goes through arbitration, there are no teeth to it. Aichon 20:04, 2 May 2010 (BST)

NV -- boxy talkteh rulz 09:04 3 May 2010 (BST)

User:Oidar

Oidar (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

I take highly offence of this: Image:Adolflikedchildren.png. Vandalism? --Cornholioo 14:45, 1 May 2010 (BST)

Category:Humorous Images Oidar 14:48, 1 May 2010 (BST)
Humorous? How dare you call that humorous? --Cornholioo 14:49, 1 May 2010 (BST)
Would you mind explaining exactly what it is that you find offensive? Oidar 14:54, 1 May 2010 (BST)
I found it funny--Michalesonbadge.pngTCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 14:54, 1 May 2010 (BST)
Please take it to a talk page somewhere -- boxy talkteh rulz 14:55 1 May 2010 (BST)
Tough. Not vandalism -- boxy talkteh rulz 14:51 1 May 2010 (BST)

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACornholioo&diff=1702380&oldid=1701661 --Cornholioo 15:10, 1 May 2010 (BST)

This is ridiculous. Not vandalism and I'll drop a train full of precedence on you if I need to. We're coming to get you, Barbara 15:44, 1 May 2010 (BST)

Not Vandalism. Open and shut case. Aichon 23:15, 1 May 2010 (BST)