UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2011 05: Difference between revisions
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
Will hold off on that for now until the case below is sorted out. There are more than them two involved. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 00:39, 2 May 2011 (BST) | Will hold off on that for now until the case below is sorted out. There are more than them two involved. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 00:39, 2 May 2011 (BST) | ||
:Fair enough. Yeah, I know more than two of them involved. I've put this guy up because he said in the case below that we should be A/VBing the people who are using the sig.--{{User:The General/sig}} 00:44, 2 May 2011 (BST) | :Fair enough. Yeah, I know more than two of them involved. I've put this guy up because he said in the case below that we should be A/VBing the people who are using the sig.--{{User:The General/sig}} 00:44, 2 May 2011 (BST) | ||
Gonna go ahead and point this out now for you {{WIKILAW}}yers: I haven't used this signature anywhere but on this very page, where it's currently being discussed. --{{Goonsig}} 01:06, 2 May 2011 (BST) | |||
===[[User:Revenant]] === | ===[[User:Revenant]] === |
Revision as of 00:06, 2 May 2011
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
|
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.
- HaroldBeaman (contribs | logs | block | del userpage | IP Check)
- HallieKetcham7 (contribs | logs | block | del userpage | IP Check)
- AlexanderNoyes7 (contribs | logs | block | del userpage | IP Check)--Cheese 17:51, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Blocked a large surge of bots -- AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:08, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- YasminLashbrook (contribs | logs | block | del userpage | IP Check) --VVV RPMBG 06:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- LoganDos626 (contribs | logs | block | del userpage | IP Check) --VVV RPMBG 06:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Both done DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 09:25, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
May 2011
User:Deadman Walken
Verdict | Vandalism |
---|---|
Action taken | 3 edit vandal |
Pointless account designed to impersonate thad and prove some point about impersonation by signing as such on admin pages. Thanks. Banned under 3ER--Rosslessness 00:48, 2 May 2011 (BST)
User:Underisk
Verdict | Incomplete |
---|---|
Action taken | None Yet |
Using the Template:Goonsig in his signature counts as impersonation.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 00:33, 2 May 2011 (BST)
Will hold off on that for now until the case below is sorted out. There are more than them two involved. -- Spiderzed█ 00:39, 2 May 2011 (BST)
- Fair enough. Yeah, I know more than two of them involved. I've put this guy up because he said in the case below that we should be A/VBing the people who are using the sig.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 00:44, 2 May 2011 (BST)
Gonna go ahead and point this out now for you WIKI LAWyers: I haven't used this signature anywhere but on this very page, where it's currently being discussed. --|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 01:06, 2 May 2011 (BST)
User:Revenant
Verdict | Incomplete |
---|---|
Action taken | None Yet |
For creating this piece of stupid and encouraging people to use it which basically undermines the very principle behind the use of signatures. Policy? God no, for something this obvious all that requires is the sysops team to have the balls to enforce some common sense. This doesn't require much additional discussion. Sharing signatures falls under impersonation, and should hereby be prohibited through precedent. I see little point in escalating the different goons using this sigs for now, though they will be required to change it.
The bad-faith is dripping of this one. Seriously Rev, what the hell are you on? -- Thadeous Oakley Talk 22:36, 1 May 2011 (BST)
- Random. Is rev finished with the template yet? I initially thought the green box was going to signify the actual user signing it from the long pink list. If only there was a way of explaining that the current signature was against policy because of impersonation and clarity concerns. Somewhere like here. Oh look vapor just beat me to it. --Rosslessness 23:02, 1 May 2011 (BST)
- I thought that too, but I think it's just because Katthew's colour is green.--Yonnua Koponen T G P ^^^ 23:32, 1 May 2011 (BST)
- Explaining that these sigs are illegal is like explaining 1+1=2. They, and especially Rev, should know much better than this. Oh and look what Vapor is getting as reactions, can we even fake a surprised face here? -- Thadeous Oakley Talk 23:38, 1 May 2011 (BST)
- I don't really expect much to come of it. So far I've pretty much received the answer I expected to get. ~ 23:57, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
- Pretty much, but hey drama, if you dont want to deal with it, then you're in the wrong place. I'm sure rev can argue his case here. He's a sensible fellow. --Rosslessness 00:11, 2 May 2011 (BST)
- So is "bad-faith" the new buzzword for things that you don't like but can't find a rule against? Serious question: which Goon ran over your dog/set your cat on fire/raped your sister (select as applicable), because you're awfully mad at us and there's no way a few wiki edits could trigger this kind of reaction. Thadeous hates Goons, can we even fake a surprised face here? --|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 00:02, 2 May 2011 (BST)
- I don't really expect much to come of it. So far I've pretty much received the answer I expected to get. ~ 23:57, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Non Involved chit chat moved to talk page.
Vandalism - As thad. I will not be responding to questions, statements or qq about my ruling in this case. My reasoning is as thad's introduction. I have no intention of getting dragged in to the drama involved in this case.--Yonnua Koponen T G P ^^^ 23:32, 1 May 2011 (BST)
Why are you putting the person who created the template up for vandalism instead of the ones using it. If I dig up one of your templates and start using it as my signature will you put yourselves up for a vandal banning vote? --|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 00:14, 2 May 2011 (BST)