UDWiki:Administration/Move Requests/Archive/2011 05
This page is for the requesting of page moves by normal users. The average user's ability to move pages has been rescinded due to frequent abuse by vandals; as such, users will need to submit requests (similar in nature to those on Speedy Deletions and Protections) for pages to be moved by a sysop.
Guidelines for requesting a Page Move
Copy the template below (Or just type it), replace the text in red with the relevant details, and paste the template under the Move Request Queue heading. A day after a sysop has taken action on the request, move requests should be moved to the Archive.
===[[PAGENAME]]===
*[[MOVE TO HERE]]
*~~~~
|
Move Request Queue
Malton Park Rangers
To the Journal or User:Vantar namespace. ~ Red Hawk One Talk | space for lease 03:12, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
- Ummm, no? -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:14 28 February 2011 (BST)
- lolwut? Why?--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 18:04, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Recent Actions
UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/Unban Amazing
- UDWiki:Poll/Unban Amazing.
- Since it's established as the place to do these things, and because the chief concern of many voters is simply the location of the vote.
21:55, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- About to run but will do it later if it still sits here. Are polls still considered wiki news? We can just keep it there and change the links right? ~
22:22, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- Why move it? He's going to have to rewrite it anyway, the current voting is moot because of his alterations. Let him create what he wants it to be, and retain the original as an abandoned policy. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 22:25, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- As Ross - it's invalidated already by editing, and still unclear in several points (as exact A/VD processing). As for wiki news, given that at least two current ops weren't even aware that there is such a thing as a poll area, it should definitively go there to ensure a broad voter base. -- Spiderzed▋ 22:29, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- UDWiki:Poll/Unban Jedaz is the only page with the prefix. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 22:33, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- Frankly, I don't think the vote's been invalidated. He hasn't changed the actual content of the discussion (it's still discussing banning amazing, he's just clarified his argument, which should actually be moved to the talk page) and it isn't a standard policy. Move it wherever, either now or after the vote is done, keep it linked from wiki news and use the results of the community vote as they should be used.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 23:37, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- He'll be better off starting again anyway, with all those voteing against, simply because it's in the wrong place. I would move everything to the talk page, and then move it, allowing Hag to re-open voting when he gets something decent written up, spelling out a few things (like what escalation level Amazing will have if returned) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 00:10 22 February 2011 (BST)
- Technically, the guidelines say that the vote is to overturn a ban, so he would presumably be at the same escalation level, but without the perma, unless we vote down each level of his escalations.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 00:11, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- I'd be tempted to draw up a new page at the UDWiki:Poll location myself in the next few days. It might be worth keeping it as a valid avenue for votes, especially with the DangerMaap and SuburbGroup proposals on the horizon. 00:15, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- I'd be tempted to draw up a new page at the UDWiki:Poll location myself in the next few days. It might be worth keeping it as a valid avenue for votes, especially with the DangerMaap and SuburbGroup proposals on the horizon.
- Technically, the guidelines say that the vote is to overturn a ban, so he would presumably be at the same escalation level, but without the perma, unless we vote down each level of his escalations.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 00:11, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- He'll be better off starting again anyway, with all those voteing against, simply because it's in the wrong place. I would move everything to the talk page, and then move it, allowing Hag to re-open voting when he gets something decent written up, spelling out a few things (like what escalation level Amazing will have if returned) -- boxy talk • teh rulz 00:10 22 February 2011 (BST)
- Frankly, I don't think the vote's been invalidated. He hasn't changed the actual content of the discussion (it's still discussing banning amazing, he's just clarified his argument, which should actually be moved to the talk page) and it isn't a standard policy. Move it wherever, either now or after the vote is done, keep it linked from wiki news and use the results of the community vote as they should be used.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 23:37, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- It wouldn't have been invalidated if he just said random crap in his response, but he changed the vote by adding proposed A/VD system which changes the vote fundamentally- it's been invalidated. I'd say the best thing to do would be to just remove his edits and let it take its course, and make our own policy for UDWiki:Polls regarding permabanned users, but I'm open to suggestions. I'll also be very disinclined to follow through on a decision made on UDWiki:Polls as compared to A/PD. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 00:30, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- If I thought there were a real need for it I'd recommend enstating A/UB with guidelines for for unbanning requests. It'd probably be either the most misused or the most abused Administration page, though. A good polling system would be best IMO. Something a bit more official than OD but for those issues that shouldn't really be proposed as a policy. ~ 04:38, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- If I thought there were a real need for it I'd recommend enstating A/UB with guidelines for for unbanning requests. It'd probably be either the most misused or the most abused Administration page, though. A good polling system would be best IMO. Something a bit more official than OD but for those issues that shouldn't really be proposed as a policy. ~
- UDWiki:Poll/Unban Jedaz is the only page with the prefix. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 22:33, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- As Ross - it's invalidated already by editing, and still unclear in several points (as exact A/VD processing). As for wiki news, given that at least two current ops weren't even aware that there is such a thing as a poll area, it should definitively go there to ensure a broad voter base. -- Spiderzed▋ 22:29, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- Why move it? He's going to have to rewrite it anyway, the current voting is moot because of his alterations. Let him create what he wants it to be, and retain the original as an abandoned policy. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 22:25, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- About to run but will do it later if it still sits here. Are polls still considered wiki news? We can just keep it there and change the links right? ~
You guys are really starting to piss me off. The important thing isn't where it is, the important thing should be whether or not it is the clear will of the community to allow Amazing a second chance after so long, and considering that this is a very different wiki to the one he got banned from. Too many arguements about the correct proceedure, and not enough getting the fuck on with it... pick a place, I don't care where, and ask for opinions on the issue (not the legitimacy of it's position in this or that namespace). Work out what to do with it later, FFS -- boxy talk • teh rulz 08:28 22 February 2011 (BST)
- Yeah, the reason you're getting so pissed off is because everyone's ignoring you because no one agrees with you. we know what you think. we KNOW. you believe people should be able to vote on any issue at hand but talk like this when that same vote is yielding an opinion that you find irrelevant? give it a fucking rest if you're gonna chuck a shitty. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 09:33, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Box, it obviously does matter where it is, given the number of votes whose only reasoning are "this is not the place for votes like this". Simple. 19:29, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- It obviously doesn't - those people just clearly don't understand voting rationale.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 22:11, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Clearly.
~ 22:23, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Clearly.
- It obviously doesn't - those people just clearly don't understand voting rationale.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 22:11, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Box, it obviously does matter where it is, given the number of votes whose only reasoning are "this is not the place for votes like this". Simple.
Ok so we're obviously not going to move the page now. Before this gets cycled, I'm going to go ahead and say clear this off the queue. Not moved. ~ 18:20, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Template:Skills
To Template:SSkills or something similar. It's a very old, almost unused template, and I was hoping on using the name for some work with the Skills pages. ~ Red Hawk One Talk | space for lease 04:58, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Urgh. Suggest moving to Template:ImAFuckingTrenchBastard instead. 20:34, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Moved to Template:Skillsdontmatter. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 20:54, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Wutz
Should we move this page into the user space, perhaps, since it looks like the info User:Wutz provided was correct? Make it his user page? -- boxy talk • teh rulz 08:05 16 February 2011 (BST)
- done. Now that the comments are all on the talk, it works perfectly and can all be forgotten about.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 08:13, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Character/Userspace
Moved User:Jenny to User:Beno/Jenny. Character page created in usersapce. ~ 18:48, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Missed this. In the future this isn't actually necessary, as character pages in the user namespace are essentially the same as alternate accounts for roleplaying purposes. It's when they're in the main space that they need to be moved. 21:01, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- It should also be documented that JennyHRPicture was moved to User:Beno/Jenny/HRPicture by Spidey. ~ 21:09, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- It should also be documented that JennyHRPicture was moved to User:Beno/Jenny/HRPicture by Spidey. ~
userspace stuff
User:Thanatologist/Sandbox00 --> User:Thanatologist/Sandbox/00
User:Thanatologist/Sandbox01 --> User:Thanatologist/Sandbox/01
User:Thanatologist/Sandbox02 --> User:Thanatologist/Sandbox/02
User:Thanatologist/Sandbox03 --> User:Thanatologist/Sandbox/03
User:Thanatologist/Sandbox04 --> User:Thanatologist/Sandbox/04
tnx. will fix teh links myself. -- † talk ? f.u. 13:20, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- wow. that was fast. -- † talk ? f.u. 13:51, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Speedy archives
Sysops are not moderators. =p
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/November-2005 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/November-2005
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/December-2005 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/December-2005
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/January-2006 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/January-2006
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/February-2006 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/February-2006
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/March-2006 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/March-2006
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/April-2006 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/April-2006
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/May-2006 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/May-2006
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Jun-2006 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Jun-2006
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Jul-2006 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Jul-2006
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Aug-2006 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Aug-2006
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Sep-2006 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Sep-2006
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Oct-2006 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Oct-2006
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Nov-2006 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Nov-2006
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Dec-2006 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Dec-2006
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/February-2007 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/February-2007
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/March-2007 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/March-2007
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/April-2007 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/April-2007
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/May-2007 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/May-2007
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Jun-2007 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Jun-2007
- UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Jul-2007 --> UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/Jul-2007
Enjoy. -- Cheese 19:02, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
UDWiki:Administration/Bureaucrat_Promontions/November_2008
Spelling error which I'm too lazy and ill to fix. Go, new sysops, go!--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 12:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Done Incoming links changed, redirect deleted. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 12:58, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Red Rev Net/Kill List
Needs to go to Red rev net/Kill List. -- Cheese 14:25, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- Done. ~ 17:00, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
ANNUSHORRIBILIS/groupbox
Needs moved to Annus Horribilis/groupbox. The inclusion on Annus Horribilis will need to be changed too. -- Cheese 01:13, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- Done. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 07:52, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Template:Dark Envy Incorporated/Recruit
Created in template space rather than group space. Author notified. ~ 20:20, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Also, be sure to make change at Category:Recruitment#Dark_Envy_Incorporated:_Survivor after the move. ~ 20:24, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Done.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 07:40, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Adolph Audley
Character page without user namespace thing. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 23:19, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Done by DDR a couple of days ago.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 15:25, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Wutz
Perhaps we should move this out of the mainspace, perhaps to UDWiki:Open Discussion/Wutz? -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 23:57, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
- Keep it mainspace. It's good to document current events that might be of use to "historians" later. Maybe give it a more descriptive name, though, and keep the current name as a redirect. "Wutz Zerg Horde" or "Wutz Zerg Phenomenon" maybe. 12:27, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- Okay I guess. I don't like justifying zerg hordes by making a page about them in the mainspace where it's searchable. But if no one really cares that much then it won't hurt anyone by staying. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 00:47, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- It's unusually large, though, and apparently target-less, too, which sets it apart. It's not one of the smaller griefing hordes which pop up much more regularly and unspectacularly. 00:52, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- We don't know that it isnt yet. In a week 90% of them could be gone. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 01:30, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- If it turns in to the massive thing which it appears to be, then it would be good as an "event" page, as it were. Otherwise, we can always move it some archive page at a later date, if they all just idle.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 22:55, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- Just for the record, I totally disagree. Under absolutely no circumstances have we (nor should we) document large and notable zerg attacks. It justifies their attention seeking and effort it takes to cheat. I guarantee you all Finis' zerg presence was more prolific than this will ever be, yet there's not a sniff of it on the wiki. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 23:56, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- Wah? The fenis zergs were promoted by the BBKs, on the wiki, at the time... but yeah, it's a bit counter productive to give zergers publicity. I have a feeling that this lot are simply someone looking to "steal code" by bot, and will die a natural death, without in-game problems. But it is a policy nightmare, working out whether we should allow pages such as these to persist -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:26 3 February 2011 (BST)
- Yeah, we did it because he was actually on the wiki and our pressuring was an attempt at getting him to stop. That was also unproven at the time, this is without a doubt a huge zerging issue. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 10:32, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, yes... but what should "we" do about it... if anything? Wiki policy is somewhere between "in game" players and "game devs". We have a responsibility to encourage "fair play", yet also to report in game "events" -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:48 3 February 2011 (BST)
- This is hardly a game event. Calling it an event would be a huge stretch unless the resistance by players (which is happening) became prolific and organised enough to somewhat affect the rate of which the zergs operate on a large level. And it'd have to be written NPOV. This isn't an event, just a page of sightings. And I am in NO way willing to make leeway on policy for cheaters. Any publicity is good publicity for zergs ont his level trying to make a point. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 11:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- I agree. There shouldn't have been a "Fenis" page, and there shouldn't be a Wutz page. If it becomes a big enough problem, that an anit-Wutz group springs up, then they can host it as a group sub-page... but should it be placed in the discussion namespace until then (or until it dies out)? -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:18 3 February 2011 (BST)
- Yeah, I'm with moving out of mainspace to open discussion. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 11:25, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- I agree. There shouldn't have been a "Fenis" page, and there shouldn't be a Wutz page. If it becomes a big enough problem, that an anit-Wutz group springs up, then they can host it as a group sub-page... but should it be placed in the discussion namespace until then (or until it dies out)? -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:18 3 February 2011 (BST)
- This is hardly a game event. Calling it an event would be a huge stretch unless the resistance by players (which is happening) became prolific and organised enough to somewhat affect the rate of which the zergs operate on a large level. And it'd have to be written NPOV. This isn't an event, just a page of sightings. And I am in NO way willing to make leeway on policy for cheaters. Any publicity is good publicity for zergs ont his level trying to make a point. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 11:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, yes... but what should "we" do about it... if anything? Wiki policy is somewhere between "in game" players and "game devs". We have a responsibility to encourage "fair play", yet also to report in game "events" -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:48 3 February 2011 (BST)
- Yeah, we did it because he was actually on the wiki and our pressuring was an attempt at getting him to stop. That was also unproven at the time, this is without a doubt a huge zerging issue. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 10:32, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Wah? The fenis zergs were promoted by the BBKs, on the wiki, at the time... but yeah, it's a bit counter productive to give zergers publicity. I have a feeling that this lot are simply someone looking to "steal code" by bot, and will die a natural death, without in-game problems. But it is a policy nightmare, working out whether we should allow pages such as these to persist -- boxy talk • teh rulz 10:26 3 February 2011 (BST)
- Just for the record, I totally disagree. Under absolutely no circumstances have we (nor should we) document large and notable zerg attacks. It justifies their attention seeking and effort it takes to cheat. I guarantee you all Finis' zerg presence was more prolific than this will ever be, yet there's not a sniff of it on the wiki. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 23:56, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- If it turns in to the massive thing which it appears to be, then it would be good as an "event" page, as it were. Otherwise, we can always move it some archive page at a later date, if they all just idle.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 22:55, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- We don't know that it isnt yet. In a week 90% of them could be gone. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 01:30, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- It's unusually large, though, and apparently target-less, too, which sets it apart. It's not one of the smaller griefing hordes which pop up much more regularly and unspectacularly.
- Okay I guess. I don't like justifying zerg hordes by making a page about them in the mainspace where it's searchable. But if no one really cares that much then it won't hurt anyone by staying. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 00:47, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
Sooooooo the alts are banned and so logically nothing more can be added to this page. Thoughts? -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 03:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
User:Blades/BLADES IS WATCHIN'
Can this please just be moved back. I don't know why you guys don't like this. You liken it to STREETS IS WATCHIN' but it's more like Blanemcc is a PKer, and is just as popular as the latter to boot. I see it everywhere. I missed the last discussion, can we resurrect it here? -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 00:21, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- Glad I wasn't the only one thought so. Done. 00:23, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
Zompaloompas
To The Randoms/Zompaloompas plz. -- Cheese 00:52, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- Done by the German Democratic Republic. 00:23, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
| Move Requests Archive | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
