UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2008 12
|
Vandal Banning Archive | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
December 2008
User:Jerrel Yokotory
Jerrel Yokotory (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
This edit and also some idiocy here. --Janus talk 14:01, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- And here. --Janus talk 14:03, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- Last time I checked, idiocy didn't count as an A/VB offense, but the other two clearly to (violation of page ownership guidelines. Meh, he posted a similar message on my talk page before. Linkthewindow Talk 14:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I posted the idiocy thing because of all the signatures+timestamps he wrote on your talk page. I don't see that alone as vandalism. --Janus talk 14:29, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- A lot of dodgy edits and in the case of his borehamwood template edit a plain lie. But at least one vaguely helpful edit. IP check shows he's not a regular spammer. You've explained to him what he's doing wrong, and as such I'm willing to wait and see what his next edit is. Any repeat offence and he gets warned. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 14:37, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- The edit to the KOTA page is an edit to a group page that he is not a member of, and one to an archive and not in any way constructive. Such edits have been ruled vandalism this month on this page. --
.
. <== DDR Approved Editor 14:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- The edit to the KOTA page is an edit to a group page that he is not a member of, and one to an archive and not in any way constructive. Such edits have been ruled vandalism this month on this page. --
- A lot of dodgy edits and in the case of his borehamwood template edit a plain lie. But at least one vaguely helpful edit. IP check shows he's not a regular spammer. You've explained to him what he's doing wrong, and as such I'm willing to wait and see what his next edit is. Any repeat offence and he gets warned. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 14:37, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I posted the idiocy thing because of all the signatures+timestamps he wrote on your talk page. I don't see that alone as vandalism. --Janus talk 14:29, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- Last time I checked, idiocy didn't count as an A/VB offense, but the other two clearly to (violation of page ownership guidelines. Meh, he posted a similar message on my talk page before. Linkthewindow Talk 14:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I'm sorry guys, and like he said, I'm not a regular spammer, and from now on, the information on any page that I edit will be good. I'm sorry for being a Jack butt andf from now on I will try hard to not be an idiot. idiocracy is a gene of mine so I can't help it, but I'm not gonna do it again, Alright!--Jerrel Yokotory 14:43, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- Actually Iscariot is right (Wow twice in a week). Misread it as a talk page, but as an archive page it it Vandalism and a such a warning. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 15:00, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- Had I been in my normal vindictive mood I'd have made a new case for this edit, editing a user page with no apparent good faith. You can include this in the first warning or go for a second escalation, I'm not fussed, I must be ill or something. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 15:06, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- Had I been in my normal vindictive mood I'd have made a new case for this edit, editing a user page with no apparent good faith. You can include this in the first warning or go for a second escalation, I'm not fussed, I must be ill or something. --
I'm really sorry but if I am good for a month could I get the warning out of the system? I mean I've only been here for a week and I'm already in the system......--Jerrel Yokotory 15:20, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- It's not uncommon. I was taken to vandal banning 4 hours after logging on to the wiki. Some of our finest contributors have made edits considered vandalism. Make 250 edits and in a month the warning will be struck. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 15:28, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
A month and 250 edits is a lot of edits and time.......--Jerrel Yokotory 20:54, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
User:Soldier
Soldier (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
This edit shows that he removed one of my comments on a page that was not his and where he had no right to do so. --Pestolence(talk) 19:35, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- Content restored with an explanatory note. Page ownership guidelines are clear, if Cortez wishes to remove your comments, he can. Soldier cannot. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 19:41, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Warned -- boxy talk • teh rulz 01:21 14 December 2008 (BST)
- Sergeant William Holt identified as an alt. No wrong footing. Yet. -- Cheese 22:07, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- Should his warning be transferred to the new account, then? --Pestolence(talk) 01:05, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
User:Jaysed
Jaysed (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
Malicious editing of another group's records. -- 
.
. <== DDR Approved Editor 11:23, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- Warned - but holy hell! That kill list is full of links to user pages, and the great majority of them appear to be non-existent users. I thought that PK was supposed to be full of learned people... not a group of wiki n00bs who don't understand that the vast majority of UD characters don't have corresponding wiki user accounts! -- boxy talk • teh rulz 12:05 13 December 2008 (BST)
- It's nice to know that each ruling now comes with a completely superfluous opinion about one of the groups in the case. Wonderful, perhaps I should start doing this about the sysop team when I make a case.... -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 12:09, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- It's nice to know that each ruling now comes with a completely superfluous opinion about one of the groups in the case. Wonderful, perhaps I should start doing this about the sysop team when I make a case.... --
User:An unlucky guy
An unlucky guy (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
Warned - see case below -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:39 12 December 2008 (BST)
User:We Cell
We Cell (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
Edits to the page of another group. Multiple edits, its reasons like this we need to be giving some normal users here rollback.... -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 14:06, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
- Nonono I can explain. I contacted the other group and asked them to edit or delete, but the guy who did it also deleted our page, so I assumed he is just a vandal. I then found out he's the leader of the group and will not attempt to edit their page anymore; we'll just duplicate what we had to say back on our page. Thanks for understanding.--We Cell 16:47, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
- You sell, they sell, we sell, i ban... XD... do not edit other people group pages, We Cell. Nuff said, no warning for today since i'm in a good mood today. --People's Commissar Hagnat talk mod 17:26, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
We Cell 19:59, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
- You sell, they sell, we sell, i ban... XD... do not edit other people group pages, We Cell. Nuff said, no warning for today since i'm in a good mood today. --People's Commissar Hagnat talk mod 17:26, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
- Clear vandalism, along with the edits to the Game Over page by An unlucky guy (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss), and both should be warned (good mood or not) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 22:05 11 December 2008 (BST)
- No harm done, both edits reverted, both users already advised to stay away from each other group page... i dont see why we should punish them when their learnt their lesson. Besides, that awesome face i just got is just... awesome --People's Commissar Hagnat talk mod 23:43, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
- A warning is not a punishment. It is to help us keep track of users prior behaviour. If they learn their lesson, then the warning will go away. If this continues, then we will be able to show the reason to take harsher measures on such vandalism. "I wont do it again" is all well and good, but shouldn't stop us recording these incidents (especially since it's only come from one side so far) on A/VD -- boxy talk • teh rulz 04:42 12 December 2008 (BST)
- A warning IS punishment since it serves as a bridge for the true punishment of the ban-hammer. Unlucky guy also admitted that his actions were against the rules and was willing to accept any punishment. Anywya, warn then if you want... this is such a small issue and they both already know better that i feel it wouldn't do harm to let it pass. --People's Commissar Hagnat talk mod 10:42, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
- A warning is not a punishment. It is to help us keep track of users prior behaviour. If they learn their lesson, then the warning will go away. If this continues, then we will be able to show the reason to take harsher measures on such vandalism. "I wont do it again" is all well and good, but shouldn't stop us recording these incidents (especially since it's only come from one side so far) on A/VD -- boxy talk • teh rulz 04:42 12 December 2008 (BST)
- No harm done, both edits reverted, both users already advised to stay away from each other group page... i dont see why we should punish them when their learnt their lesson. Besides, that awesome face i just got is just... awesome
Warned -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:39 12 December 2008 (BST)
User:Rohanzap
Rohanzap (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
For this edit to my group page. Umbrella member, probably sent by Thadeous Gay Oakley. --Haliman - Talk 01:25, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand the whole haliman politics happening atm, but the guy has made other vandal edits, eg these.--xoxo 01:30, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
- Politics allude me, but this edit is clear bad faith, removal of another user's signed post on a past event. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 01:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
I am getting sick of Umbrella's games. --Haliman - Talk 01:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
User:DARKSIDEX
DARKSIDEX (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
Edits to a group page that said user is not a member of. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 10:15, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
User:Haliman111
Haliman111 (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
Broke arbitration ruling by directly contacting me twice (in a rude manner) before the 8 weeks of no-contact were over.--Thadeous Oakley 10:28, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Arbitration Case User:Krazy Monkey (arbitrator of the case)
- You need to show bad faith in the attepmt, responding to what seems to have been provocation or not wanting to hear from someone on the wiki doesn't merit punishment on his part.--Karekmaps?! 10:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
- "First of all, in order to prevent any arguments, both parties are forbidden from contacting the other on the wiki in any form for a period of 8 weeks from today. This is binding and if broken may result in vandal escalations.". I am not a wiki law expert but the above seems pretty clear to me.--Thadeous Oakley 11:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
- There's a reason he said may. That reason is that we aren't bound by anything an arbiter's whim when it comes to whether or not an arbitration violation is grounds for vandal escalation. We have a higher standard here than simply breaking what amounts to a formal agreement between two users mediated by a third user. The standard of punishment requires that there is harm to someone somewhere, not just two users disliking each other enough that they refuse to communicate.--Karekmaps?! 12:44, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
- To clarify; In this case to get me to rule vandalism you would need to show him to be harassing you, you haven't yet. At least not to a point where I believe involvement on our(sysop's/A/VB) part is justifiable, just ignore him.--Karekmaps?! 12:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
- Lulz. I'm actually reporting an Umbrella member for BLATANTLY editing my page. One moment... --Haliman - Talk 01:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
- Okay Karek, I understand. Though I'd like to point out the statement by him under the vandal banning of Rohanzap on this page, another clear example of such harassing behavior.--Thadeous Oakley 19:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
- Lulz. I'm actually reporting an Umbrella member for BLATANTLY editing my page. One moment... --Haliman - Talk 01:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
- To clarify; In this case to get me to rule vandalism you would need to show him to be harassing you, you haven't yet. At least not to a point where I believe involvement on our(sysop's/A/VB) part is justifiable, just ignore him.--Karekmaps?! 12:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
- There's a reason he said may. That reason is that we aren't bound by anything an arbiter's whim when it comes to whether or not an arbitration violation is grounds for vandal escalation. We have a higher standard here than simply breaking what amounts to a formal agreement between two users mediated by a third user. The standard of punishment requires that there is harm to someone somewhere, not just two users disliking each other enough that they refuse to communicate.--Karekmaps?! 12:44, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
- "First of all, in order to prevent any arguments, both parties are forbidden from contacting the other on the wiki in any form for a period of 8 weeks from today. This is binding and if broken may result in vandal escalations.". I am not a wiki law expert but the above seems pretty clear to me.--Thadeous Oakley 11:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
User:Venger
Venger (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
Did stuff to Sonny's userpage plus I reverted the rest of his edits also.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS 
LOE ZHU | Яezzens 22:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- We should keep track of these butthurt guys that vandalize sonny's userpage... have a template or somethin...--/~Rakuen~\Talk
I Still Love Grim 23:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Warned -- boxy talk • teh rulz 05:54 2 December 2008 (BST)
This is just a note to say that the following users are using the same IP address and more than likely the same person, judging by their hating of Sonny:
- Venger (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
- Firetwig (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
- Firetwigzed (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
That is all. -- Cheese 21:10, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
- Just wanna step in for a sec, Firetwig is a guy from the Brainstock forums... Guess he don't like sonny :/ --/~Rakuen~\Talk I Still Love Grim 00:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Venger has been permbanned as a vandal alt of Firetwig -- boxy talk • teh rulz 02:23 3 December 2008 (BST)
- So the vandal alt is banned but the main account isn't warned? LOLWUT? --Sonny Corleone DORIS MSD pr0n 21:16, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, I saw the warning had been moved to his A/VD entry, and didn't look on his talk page. Anyway, warned now -- boxy talk • teh rulz 05:23 5 December 2008 (BST)
