UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2009 09
|
Vandal Banning Archive | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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)
September 2009
The_3pwv_...
The_3pwv_... (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
| Verdict | {{{1}}} |
|---|---|
| Action taken | {{{2}}} |
Reported, for being the 3pwv. I thought I would just remind people of the correct procedure. Its likely that the mods have gotten sloppy. The 3pwv ... 18:58, 7 September 2009 (BST)
Nallan
Nallan (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
| Verdict | {{{1}}} |
|---|---|
| Action taken | {{{2}}} |
For submitting the below case. Usually I don't do this but I suspect this is just a product of J3D requiring Nallan to submit it rather than himself to temporarily salvage his image for the relevant case further down. I request a soft warning. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 13:21, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- You 'suspect' therefore you submit for VB, very unlike you I hope you pull this or something....you can't put someone up for VB on suspicion, it's entirely what Bob did and you voted Misconduct for.--CyberRead240 14:40, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- Big difference in the cases, but nice try. That A/VB was clearly petty and was more "shitting up" an admin page than Bob's comment. Vandalism. --– Nubis NWO 19:44, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- You don't see me putting J3D up do you? Hence I'm not a) acting on a suspicion (which would be putting J3D up based on the 'suspicion' he's using nick to meatpuppet cases), I'm acting, rather, on the case below being petty and, b) I'm not ruling soley on this case, hence not acting on a 'suspicion'. There's a mountain of difference between this and that which you cite. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 03:33, 7 September 2009 (BST)
- Contrary to what you might think, I am capable of independent thought - amazing as it may seem to you, DDR.--Nallan (Talk) 04:30, 7 September 2009 (BST)
Cyberbob (3)
Cyberbob240 (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
| Verdict | Not Vandalism |
|---|---|
| Action taken | {{{2}}} |
Shitting up admin pages.--Nallan (Talk) 06:47, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- This case is a supreme irony and possibly vandalism in of itself. Cyberbob Talk 06:52, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- Not only was the comment irrelevant, frivolous and inflammatory... but after I moved it to the Talk page, which seemed to be the appropriate thing to do with such completely counterproductive "commentary", cyberbob actually undid that edit. IMNSHO definately an edit not in the interest of improving the wiki and certainly shitting up the admin page. --WanYao 07:06, 6 September 2009 (BST)
You know what? Can a 3rd party file an Arbitration case... To force two other parties to stop shitting up Admin pages and just generally being asshats? Seriously. In best interests of the wiki, Cyberbob not file any further vandalism cases against the 2 Cool clique, and that the 2 Cool clique should not file any more fucking Vandalism or Misconduct cases against Cyberbob. Leave the filing of such cases up to others. Because at this point I don't think either party can be trusted to be objective about this. I don't care if they are, in fact, attempting to be as objective as possible -- they will never have the appearance of objectivity, and I believe that they will never have the reality of objectivity, either. And in the meantime this feud is needlessly shitting up the Admin pages and causing pointless drama.
So... Do we have a deal? You guys want to step up and take the opportunity to start acting like adults? And voluntarily accept this restriction? --WanYao 08:55, 6 September 2009 (BST)
See talk page
Not vandalism, it was a case brought against him -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:51 6 September 2009 (BST)
Not Vandalism --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 13:38, 6 September 2009 (BST)
Not Vandalism --– Nubis NWO 19:42, 6 September 2009 (BST)
Cyberbob240 (2)
Cyberbob240 (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
| Verdict | {{{1}}} |
|---|---|
| Action taken | {{{2}}} |
For repeatedly submitting petty cases to A/VB. This report is specifically motivated by the report against J3D below -- which just the latest in a string of mostly petty cases made against j3d and his group of friends. While some of the actions/reprots are certainly legitimate, taken as a whole they represent an obviously personal agenda. And the utter frivolity of last case in particular takes it to point of, if not out-and-out harassment, definately a case of bad faith shitting up an admin page. --WanYao 06:37, 6 September 2009 (BST)
See talk page
I can see a soft warning coming on soon, but not vandalism yet -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:50 6 September 2009 (BST)
Soft Warning - I see little difference with what Bob does to J3D as what the latter does to us sysops. While J3D does it out of bitterness (or 'for the lulz' as he would probably claim), I don't approve of Bob using contentious and borderline cases via the A/VB system to push out the users that he has personal conflicts with. Without solid evidence towards long term harassment (which I'm not obliged to find myself because I don't think it exists thus far), there is nothing here that requires more than a soft warning at this point. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 13:16, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- Not Vandalism Bob has every right to post a case on any edit that he sees as "bad faith". How can you claim that users can submit A/M cases whenever they want (even on things not using sysop powers) but Bob can't report anything that he sees as bad faith? Perhaps, if the "guidelines" on A/VB said that you have to post on the user's talk page before making a case these things wouldn't happen. But since that isn't really part of the policy you can't punish him for making cases unti you are ready to bring a harassment case against him. And with these two more than likely both would go down for it.--– Nubis NWO 19:40, 6 September 2009 (BST)
J3D (2)
J3D (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
| Verdict | {{{1}}} |
|---|---|
| Action taken | {{{2}}} |
I don't think anybody could reasonably argue that the use of the word "negress" in this way is anything but racist. Cyberbob Talk 06:28, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- Actually i will argue. Negress is the female version of negro, akin to jewess. While some people may find those words offensive they are not intrinsically racist like one might argue "nigger" is. --xoxo 06:31, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- I know exactly what it is the female version of. The fact that you used a racial term as an insult is all that is relevant here - oh and by the way the word "jewess" is pretty fucking racist. Cyberbob Talk 06:33, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- Some find it racist, some don't. It is not even close to universally accepted as racist as "nigger". And i wasn't calling hungnut that as an insult, merely a term of endearment.--xoxo 06:35, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- Hmmmmno don't think that's going to fly. Cyberbob Talk 06:37, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- In Hagnats language, Negro, or Negress, means close friend and can also mean "person of Individual Skin Colour". In his country that word is used as the polite way of describing someone who is dear to them, regardless of colour. It is "Negra" that means black person.--CyberRead240 06:38, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- here is an example of the word Negro being used as the colour Black as well, another common use in the Spanish language--CyberRead240 06:48, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- Hmmmmno don't think that's going to fly. Cyberbob Talk 06:37, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- Some find it racist, some don't. It is not even close to universally accepted as racist as "nigger". And i wasn't calling hungnut that as an insult, merely a term of endearment.--xoxo 06:35, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- I know exactly what it is the female version of. The fact that you used a racial term as an insult is all that is relevant here - oh and by the way the word "jewess" is pretty fucking racist. Cyberbob Talk 06:33, 6 September 2009 (BST)
See bob, clearly not offencive, quite different to the word "nigger" --xoxo 06:40, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- Yeah, if you had used "nigger" I would understand why you would be taken to a/vb. But negress? Why I'd be delighted to be called a negress!--Nallan (Talk) 06:42, 6 September 2009 (BST)
See talk page
It does look like a "term of endearment" type comment for mine... I'm pretty sure that Hagnat wouldn't take offense at it -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:43 6 September 2009 (BST)
- Retain vote #4 has some interesting comments from Bob... -- boxy talk • teh rulz 12:37 6 September 2009 (BST)
Not Vandalism - I'm not going to vote vandalism to every joking use (or variation) of the word "nigger", and pulling him up for every one of its uses like a nazi isn't looking good for you Bob, particularly after Boxy's link above demonstrating how you use it to demonstrate petty personal examples yourself. I know the contexts of that and this are different, but unlike his two last escalations where J3D spouted it out in bold on a highly viewed admin page (rather than actually voting as is A/PM's use), or the below example where Read defamed Australian Indigenous tribesmen as being offensive, uncultured thieves, this is just a racist joke in its smallest form. Poor form, simply ignore it as such. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 13:03, 6 September 2009 (BST)
User:J3D
J3D (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
| Verdict | {{{1}}} |
|---|---|
| Action taken | {{{2}}} |
For creating a metric shitton of stupid personal cases against people over the past year. This has been ruled Not Vandalism before based on a supposed inability to prove a pattern, but I feel the torrent of cases we have seen from him over the last few days finish the job more than sufficiently. I can link to them all if I must but I'd say that pretty much everyone in a position to rule on this knows about the cases I'm referring to. Cyberbob Talk 04:43, 5 September 2009 (BST)
- Link or GTFO cyberbob. I don't want nubis' overactive imagination ruling on this case i want some solid links, don't be a lazy sod and get hunting *jabs cyberbob with stick*--xoxo 04:45, 5 September 2009 (BST)
eh. escalate me for this if y'all want, can't say i care at all. Didn't have time to thoroughly look at all links (just gave em a quick skim ;) ) but it seems while they are minor, they are also valid concerns (excluding drunk ddr one). People should be allowed to bring cases if they believe they are vandalism, even if nobody else does. Warning me or banning me or wahtever won't change that attitude.--xoxo 04:02, 6 September 2009 (BST)
- Indeed they should - for the most part. Sometimes it gets to the point where it becomes obvious that the only reason a person thinks that something is vandalism is because they personally dislike the other person. I've been guilty of this myself on occasion but I've tried not to make a habit of it - whereas you practically get off on it. Cyberbob Talk 06:31, 6 September 2009 (BST)
See talk page
I'm not going to vandal ban people for misconduct cases (barring complete nonsense), it is like the court of appeal, and users need to be free to appeal sysop decisions there, even if it becomes extremely tiring... however this rash of VB cases, back and forth is likely to end in soft warnings, or more, very soon -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:41 6 September 2009 (BST)
Vandalism - I support the questioning of our sysops via A/VB and A/M completely, but J3D has persisted in a manor which has simply served as taking up our time with cases that are not only petty, but he doesn't even bother bringing them in an appropriate or workable manor. Here he spends more time defending himself for bringing said case, whilst here he just leaps on one legitimate case with a stupid, one-sentence reason which doesn't give the background to the misconduct in question. Approaching a case with language like this is also nothing to be proud of. Cases like this deflate the misconduct in question entirely. And here is a demonstration of him going through with cases before actually reading the simple details, as was this. I like users that question our actions, but J3D seems to just want to be the first one to put forward the case without any care for its result... At leased Iscariot tried... --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 13:36, 6 September 2009 (BST)
I'd vote this Vandalism, too, for the reasons that DDR gave. However, since I seem to be a personal favorite I think that makes me less objective and will withhold my vote for now.--– Nubis NWO 19:35, 6 September 2009 (BST)
User:Nallan
Nallan (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
| Verdict | Vandalism |
|---|---|
| Action taken | Warned |
For uploading the pornographic image File:2cola100.jpeg. As not all the sysops have actually seen it, I only expect those who did to rule accordingly. It may have already been deleted but Nallan's intentions were clear and he should be warned as such. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 15:12, 4 September 2009 (BST)
- I think it would be a better idea to upload a copy to give those sysops who haven't seen it an opportunity to make up their own minds on it, rather than having to just take it on faith. =/ We've had these "pr0n images" discussions before and most of the time they usually are judged not to be. -- Cheese 15:17, 4 September 2009 (BST)
Warned -- boxy talk • teh rulz 04:27 5 September 2009 (BST)
User:Sexylegsread
Sexylegsread (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
| Verdict | Vandalism |
|---|---|
| Action taken | Warned |
Uploading a heavily racist image as a vehicle for the rules of posting on his talk page. Cyberbob Talk 09:47, 4 September 2009 (BST)
- and you want to make a case against Jed using Administration as a medium for continuing a personal vendetta? You've sure been on your game this week. As far as this issue goes, it is my talk page and I can have what I want there, you don't know shit about my heritage or my situation so maybe you should have considered using more passive means of finding a solution to this if it so verily offended you, rather than bringing it here to only publicize this "heavily racist" image and fuel a personal battle. I won't be replying as not much needs to be said now, my talk page, my rules, if you have a problem with the image or its conents, there are/were plenty of other ways for you to deal with it without bringing it to this public forum.--CyberRead240 09:53, 4 September 2009 (BST)
Now I know why he wanted that warning struck... Vandalism, because of TOU's racism clause, jed's past racism-related escalations as precedence, etc. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 13:34, 4 September 2009 (BST)
- All o you wanna bring me down. Y'all ain't stoppin me--CyberRead240 15:39, 4 September 2009 (BST)
Warned and image deleted -- boxy talk • teh rulz 04:31 5 September 2009 (BST)
- You should have left that up for longer to allow at least a 3rd sysop to vote. --xoxo 04:35, 5 September 2009 (BST)
- Apparently making fun of your own race is racism these days. Fucking goody-goody politically over-correct society. It's more racist that they are stopping me from making fun of my own people.--CyberRead240 04:37, 5 September 2009 (BST)
- I am a third sysop. Cyberbob Talk 04:38, 5 September 2009 (BST)
Cyberbob
Cyberbob240 (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
| Verdict | Not vandalism |
|---|---|
| Action taken | Arbies |
editing my groups subpage without permission --xoxo 09:05, 3 September 2009 (BST)
- I am removing myself from the "fanclub" listing, on which I was placed along with a rather insulting note - all without my permission. This has been fought out before many times over on A/VB and A/A; you cannot list someone as a member of something they do not want to be a part of. I am taking this to Arbitration. Cyberbob Talk 09:06, 3 September 2009 (BST)
- well you did misspell babi--CyberRead240 14:56, 3 September 2009 (BST)es as babbies on IRC so while insulting, it is the truth.--xoxo 09:08, 3 September 2009 (BST)
- on a serious note i understand if you don't want to be on there but you could have contacted me via my talk or arbitration rather than lauching straight at a group page, you should know better bob yet time and time again you demonstrate you don't.--xoxo 09:10, 3 September 2009 (BST)
Not Vandalism - This has always been a case for A/A. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 09:16, 3 September 2009 (BST) - self-struck. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 09:28, 3 September 2009 (BST)
- Involved party, invalid vote and please learn to spell vandalism before you rule next time thanks.--xoxo 09:18, 3 September 2009 (BST)
- actually that shouldn't even be there yet.--xoxo 09:19, 3 September 2009 (BST)
Hmmm, fan club listing page that he didn't add himself to in the first place? A page that really isn't about anything in-game? And the actual name links to his user page? This edit is Not Vandalism, but this sort of issue should go to A/A to make sure there is a clear decision on whether or not people can be added to non-game related lists (and I am thinking about the Wiki Puritan list also here) that they do not want to be on. Not to mention, people should have the right to remove themselves from "fan lists" should they no longer be a fan. If it was reversed and 2 Cool removed him there wouldn't even be a case, now would there? You can't have it both ways. If this was something in-game (example kills) then the page should be protected until the issue is resolved. This is purely wiki and there is no bad faith in this edit.--– Nubis NWO 13:42, 3 September 2009 (BST)
- hang on, while the rest of your post is jibba jabba, I don't get why the point "if 2 cool removed him there wouldn't even be a case" is even a valid point....why would they remove him if they put him there.......--CyberRead240 14:37, 3 September 2009 (BST)
- Think he meant hypothetically if I put myself there and 2 Cool removed me, there wouldn't be a case. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 14:41, 3 September 2009 (BST)
- Don't doubt 2 Cool. I reckon you could edit that page with a blank space and be VBd--CyberRead240 14:42, 3 September 2009 (BST)
- I'm sure you'll succeed with one of your strawmen sooner or later. Better spam them all over the place to increase your chances. Cyberbob Talk 14:47, 3 September 2009 (BST)
- Don't think this is relevant to my post.--CyberRead240 14:56, 3 September 2009 (BST)
- Speaking of which, Bob, wassuup? I don't get you. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 14:57, 3 September 2009 (BST)
- I'm sure you'll succeed with one of your strawmen sooner or later. Better spam them all over the place to increase your chances. Cyberbob Talk 14:47, 3 September 2009 (BST)
- Don't doubt 2 Cool. I reckon you could edit that page with a blank space and be VBd--CyberRead240 14:42, 3 September 2009 (BST)
- Think he meant hypothetically if I put myself there and 2 Cool removed me, there wouldn't be a case. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 14:41, 3 September 2009 (BST)
