UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/Signature Policy

From The Urban Dead Wiki
< UDWiki:Administration‎ | Policy Discussion
Revision as of 19:03, 6 January 2013 by Axe Hack (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search
Green check.png Guidelines — Policy Document
This page is a statement of official UDWiki Policies and Rules. See Policy Discussion for policy additions and changes.
Padlock.png Administration Services — Protection.
This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log.
This policy has been extended with the passing of a policy banning blinking text in sigs.


Template signatures have the potential to be used for vandalism because there have never been any clear guidelines to stop people from changing signatures into something destructive. Edits to your own user page cannot be considered vandalism unless you impersonate someone. However an edit to a signature can be much more destructive to a wiki than any amount of attempted vandalism may be. This is because 1, User pages are protected so the signature cannot be edited by anyone else, and 2, because if the user has signed a lot of pages then it would be difficult, if not impossible, to eliminate all of the user's vandalism due to the fact that hundreds of people would have made edits over the user's edits. This policy aims to allow moderators to revert this form of vandalism.

An earlier version of this policy was proposed by The General T Sys U! P! F! based on the work of Jedaz, Amazing and Draaj from the Scroll Wars Wiki. The aim of this revision is to capture the objective points of the policy while removing the subjective clauses that led to it being voted down.

Required Link

The handle portion of your signature must link to your user page or one of its subpages so that it is easy for readers to learn more about the person behind the signature. Superscript adornments, images and other parts of your signature may link to other locations provided that such links do not violate the rules below.

What wouldn't be allowed

  • Signatures which have images higher than 14 pixels high.
  • Signatures which generally break the wiki in some way either through formatting or other means.
  • Signatures which impersonate another user.
  • Signatures which link to any of the following special pages: Special:Userlogout or Special:BlockIP.
  • Signatures which link to external links that perform malicious actions (closing the browser for example).
  • Signatures which contain images larger than 50kb.

What would be allowed

  • Anything that doesn't come under what isn't allowed.


If a signature doesn't meet the above requirements then these steps will be taken.

  • The user of the signature will be warned once and asked to change it. The user has one week to comply.
  • If the user does not change the signature then a vandalism case will be brought forth where the user may receive a warning or banning in accordance to the vandalism page. The user has three days to comply extending out till when they next sign, if they continue to sign with said signature then they will be referred for another vandalism case.
  • If a user repeats such actions then the initial warning can be skipped and the vandalism case can be brought forth immediately.

If a signature or template is changed in such a way as to seriously impair the operation of the wiki, the damage may immediately be reverted, or deleted if necessary, and the user who performed the alteration will be perma-banned with no questions asked.

Voting Section

Voting Rules
Votes must be numbered, signed, and timestamped. They can take one of two forms:
  • # comments ~~~~
  • # ~~~~

Votes that do not conform to the above will be struck by a sysop.

The only valid voting sections are For and Against. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.


  1. I think this captures the worthy points of the previous policies without getting into the subjective weeds. -- TexasFlag.gif BubbaT 08:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  2. -- Alan Watson T·RPM 10:21, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  3. Looks good to me. --SirensT RR 12:16, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  4. Yea. –Xoid MTFU! 14:15, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  5. Asheets 16:10, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  6. --Max Grivas JG / M.F.T. 16:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  7. The part that forbids Special:Logout is unnecesary, but the rest is useful.--Thari TжFedCom is BFI! 16:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  8. This fixes my only objection to the previous proposal. Paul Brunner 17:16, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  9. Yey - Pillsy FT 17:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  10. Hooray for my pornography and my obscenity! --Ron Burgundy 18:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  11. --Bonefiver 19:21, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  12. Oh yea... Conndrakamod T CFT 19:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  13. nobody likes annoying siggies--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS DORISFlag.jpg LOE ZHU | Яezzens 21:03, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  14. Policy - fuck yeah! --Funt Solo 22:02, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  15. Yep - --YuriRuler90 03:34, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
  16. Yes! Pacman.PNG......@. 03:19, 2 November 2006 (UTC) (Belqated timestamp)
  17. Yes Its now far more concise and focused, with clear explanation on the HOWS, not just the whats. --MorthBabid 18:01, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
  18. Seems reasonable. --Luigi Galleani M(A)C | M(A)F 21:36, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
  19. Yes sir.--Gage 03:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
  20. Yes - Well written and just makes sense. --John Blast 15:40, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
  21. Fine by me! --Rotten Anna-- 16:15 2 November 2006
  22. Maybe the image could be 100KB max instead of 50KB --Lt. Raptor 23:07, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
    Trust me, with the right image format you can get a lot of detail into a mere 50KB. Besides, we are trying to keep this site at least semi-accessible for dialup users. –Xoid MTFU! 04:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  23. Indeed.--Brendoshi 16:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
  24. s'all gravy---Rizo299 18:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  25. Of course, because it makes perfect sense. Schizmo 20:39, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  26. Plain common sense. I'm all for it. -- Nob666 10:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  27. I would recommend that a moderator be able to remove a particularly offensive or problematic signature immediately, rather than waiting the required week. Other than that, it looks like a formal declaration of common sense. Alan Zong 01:37, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    Putting Goatse, Tubgirl or similiar images as your signature is obviously vandalism and would be able to be dealt with through existing means. –Xoid MTFU! 01:46, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    OK, I gotta ask, what is goatse? -- TexasFlag.gif BubbaT 05:32, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    Uncyclopedia's article on it is amusing, and strangely enough, clean. Wikipedia's article if disturbingly informative. The people who researched that obviously have no life. –Xoid MTFU! 08:50, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    Uh, gag... sorry I asked. -- TexasFlag.gif BubbaT 19:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  28. Samuel Hewitt 05:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  29. Abi79 AB 15:42, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  30. For ... this should be common sense. Daniel Hicken 18:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  31. Makes sense--Sgt. Expendable 22:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  32. Sure, why not? - Dark PhantomTalk 02:31, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
  33. See above--Agent White WTFW!SGPCMS-MetaCMS 18:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)