FANDOM


(character page vandal)
(character page vandal)
Line 196: Line 196:
   
 
I don't care if you don't like the short answer, tbh, and I don't know what 'wtb' means, so I'm just going to put it this way: It doesn't matter if they're public computers. They may not be public computers. They are being used for consistent, repeat, and disruptive vandalism. This is grounds for banning, in fact, it may be grounds for permanent banning, but I want to run it by the powers that be first. We don't ban accounts because of the ''possibility'' of vandalism, and likewise we don't unban accounts because of the ''possibility'' of good faith edits. We ban accounts and IPs because of what they do. In this case, these IPs have never done anything good, and have always done the same sort of vandalism. I don't understand why you're fighting me on this, Shadowcrest. To defend this vandalism is just plain ridiculous. [[User:Semicolon|Semicolon]] ([[User talk:Semicolon|talk]]) 22:57, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 
I don't care if you don't like the short answer, tbh, and I don't know what 'wtb' means, so I'm just going to put it this way: It doesn't matter if they're public computers. They may not be public computers. They are being used for consistent, repeat, and disruptive vandalism. This is grounds for banning, in fact, it may be grounds for permanent banning, but I want to run it by the powers that be first. We don't ban accounts because of the ''possibility'' of vandalism, and likewise we don't unban accounts because of the ''possibility'' of good faith edits. We ban accounts and IPs because of what they do. In this case, these IPs have never done anything good, and have always done the same sort of vandalism. I don't understand why you're fighting me on this, Shadowcrest. To defend this vandalism is just plain ridiculous. [[User:Semicolon|Semicolon]] ([[User talk:Semicolon|talk]]) 22:57, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
  +
  +
:No one's defending vandalism, Semicolon. If you perma-ban the IP's, then unblock them at a later date, it will convince the vandal to drop the idea, because he thinks he has been perma-banned. However, unbanning him later, without giving an inclination of the unbanning, will still allow good faith users in the future. That is, of course, providing that they are public computers. Just an idea. '''[[User:Toon Ganondorf|<span style="color:green">Toon</span> <span style="color:purple">Ganondorf</span>]] [[User Talk:Toon Ganondorf|<span style="color:Gold">(t</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Toon Ganondorf|<span style="color:Gold">c)</span>]]''' 23:22, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:22, March 20, 2009

Replacement filing cabinet
Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


Vandals

Please list the names/IP's of potential vandals here. Also, if possible, tell me the page(s) they vandalized so that I can verify the claim and assess the damage. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 02:20, 28 June 2008 (UTC) I don't know but I have gotten messages of snake's codec messages changed i'll check it out. Darkness studios Help desk (talk) 04:47, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

84.86.247.17 Yet another vandal! I pity you, Chawk, having to ban all of these. He's just adding in all completely stupid comments on the "Did you know?" template. ~Teh Blue Blur~~You're too slow!~ 18:23, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

This guy's been messing up a random smasher page for no reason, insulting him and calling him a Jew. ~Teh Blue Blur~~You're too slow!~ 10:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

This guy's removing all content from the Tier list for no apparent reason. ~Teh Blue Blur~~You're too slow!~ 15:43, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

This Guy's been vandalizing Snake's Codec Messages page and swapping quotes with ridiculous words that are completely unacceptable. So, please ban him. (I'm working on undoing his damage.) Thanks. :) --~Teh Blue Blur~A revolution begins. 19:30, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/2good = vandal of smasher pages. GutripperSpeak

I do not know if you would call this vandal or not, but some of the articles 98.148.154.211 has made do not seem relevant to the wiki. ClonedPickle 04:31, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, 98.148.154.211 made another irrelevant article: Best falco on the west coast. ClonedPickle 07:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

If you look at This user's contributions, the only kinds he has made is editing his userpage saying "smashwiki and its mods fail, kthanxbai." ClonedPickle 06:06, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Ban this guy.--Bek The Conqueror (talk) 22:20, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/70.18.154.160. Another sockpuppet. This is far beyond annoying now. MarioGalaxyMay Guthix be with you... 21:50, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

This really should be obvious, but User:African American Ninjakoopa just owned/vandalized the wiki. Hard. 13375poolR (talk) 07:16, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Set phasers to maximum. Bek The Conqueror (talk) 19:58, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

RfR

Shouldn't both of BNK's RfR's be together. I mean, KP's are, and so are ParaGoomba's. It saves article space. Toon Ganondorf (t c)

Then do it and I'll delete the redirect. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 16:01, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Dedede

King Dedede's forward smash does actually a max of 35%, not 33%(that's on training move if you didn't know, training mode attacks does slightly less damage). The same goes for Bowser (max of 48-49% and not 46%) and Ike (max of 32%). user:Firewario February 3rd 21:24 UTC +1

I'm not questioning the facts, but when your grammar and syntax are so bad that no one can make heads or tails of your writing, it usually gets reverted. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 21:19, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppets

Almost all of the sockpuppets in the past few days have left a message on my page saying what obvious contribution they added to an article. Here are a few of them:
Special:Contributions/64.5.158.130
Special:Contributions/141.152.185.173
Special:Contributions/65.169.203.196
The last one admitted it's the same one as an old IP who brawled me before (don't ask, long story, a month or two ago). Can you semi-protect my talk page so I don't keep getting messages like the ones these IPs (all the same person) gave me? MarioGalaxyMay Guthix be with you... 23:41, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Protecting pages is not to be done lightly, and especially not something like user talk pages. Especially when the comments are about wiki. So, at best I see this request as unnecessary. --Shadowcrest 00:09, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Sky already blocked some of these IPs, apparently realizing that they were sockpuppets. C. Hawk seems to be tired of this too, as seen on one of the IP's talk pages. MarioGalaxyMay Guthix be with you... 00:12, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
And what if I disagree with any or all of those bannings? --Shadowcrest 00:24, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Well, since you're a sysop, I can't do anything about it. Either way, I got to go. It's sysops' call, not mine. MarioGalaxyMay Guthix be with you... 00:26, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Uh..

This Friedbeef1 Love 22:21, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Vandal Attack

I just thought I'd let you know that there was a vandal attck yesterday (to the SSBB fighter info pages). I have reverted all of the vandalism single handedly and I have got the IP adresses that were the cause of it:

  • 82.198.250.69‎
  • 212.85.24.35‎

If you could block those IP addresses that would be great. Just so you know the things that were done was mainly names of characters being changed for example: Ike was changed to Ike th F***ing retard, and zero suit samus was changed to SEXY BOBBIE LADY, and that is only 2 examples of at least 8-10.--MỸŠŦЄЯỸЊӘҒҒ TALK 02:02, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

THat's fine Heff, but you don't have to tell them what the vandals did, just who they are, CHawk can find out for himself. GutripperSpeak

Image difficulties

Yeah, sorry to be kind of demanding, or whiny, but would you please delete Image:Bracket Platinum Blade Tournament.gif, (couldn't really place a link to the page without having the whole thing on your talk page)? I tried to upload a new version, but something messed up, and it didn'twork right, then I tried to name it something new, but I was told it was a duplicate, so If you would just get rid of it, and from now on I guess I'll only post final versions of stuff like that to avoid trouble like this from happening.

IrvThaSol a.k.a Ungod (talk to me) 23:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Marking it for deletion will be enough. Admins regularly check the candidates for speedy deletion and deletion. Also, placing around an images name will put the link but not the picture. GutripperSpeak
Thanks, IrvThaSol a.k.a Ungod (talk to me) 23:10, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Ahem...

I gotchya. By the way (I've mentioned this many times in summaries whilst adding D tags to spam talk pages), we need to make a similar policy to QDV about stuff like that, but I don't have a good name for it. The point of it is to encourage users not to add discussion to spam/vandal/flame pages so that gives the Admin less to delete. You have to admit, it must be really annoying deleting the article then the talk page with comments from users like "We don't need this page", treating it like it deserves a chance to stay at all. So what do you say? Blue Ninjakoopa 03:15, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't think a full fledged policy is needed. I think QDV is good enough to include that. If you want to add it in and/or ask people not to put stuff on the talk pages that would be a good solution. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 06:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

"video namespace"

This is a new extension activated by default on Wikia wikis. I personally don't appreciate it, and I've noticed that you've deleted more than a few; i.e. that it only invites the videos we don't want. You should have gotten a message about it through WikiaMessages. Can I contact Wikia and ask them to turn it off? --Sky (t · c · w) 03:16, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I'll just throw in my opinion: either turn it off or create a very strict policy about uploading them, i.e. only for mainspace, and then more specific requirements. Miles (talk) 03:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
I don't know why we need people to be able to upload videos. Nine times out of ten, we don't need any videos and the rest of the time they can just be embedded. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 04:43, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Completely agree. You have my blessing to contact Kyle whenever. --Shadowcrest 19:53, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

irc

Sorry I wasn't there... I am now if you need me. --Shadowcrest 01:18, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding Fragbait.JPG

I have never uploaded this picture before and it is being used on my Smasher Page. Pages such as Affinity's and Steeler's are using similar pictures, so why did mine get deleted? A revert would be appreciated, or at least a decent explanation. Doadrin (talk) 00:51, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

What, you are an all powerful admin so you don't have to respond to users? Thats cool man, I'll reup it my damn self. Doadrin (talk) 05:45, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I didn't respond because I haven't been on in the last five hours... I do have a life besides this wiki. As for the image, it's a personal image of a borderline smasher page. I'm not sure if it really constitutes being needed, but if you want to upolad it, go ahead. Just don't be surprised if that whole page gets judged not notable. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 05:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

SA

Um... not to be a bitch again, but why did you delete the main page for SA? Squallinoa 08 (talk) 21:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, it was linked to as the list of past fights page. I didn't realize that it had been changed. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 21:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
That's alright, no foul no harm done. (whew, no wondered why Miles or Gutripper put it in the front page). Squallinoa 08 (talk) 22:01, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Adminship

Hey Clarinet Hawk. I've got a request. In case you didn't know, Wikia recently allowed it so that b'crats can now remove sysop status (but not b'crat status). So what I was wondering if you could remove my admin status. The main reason is I'm not active here and I haven't played any SSB game since April 08, so I can't really help out the community. I'm still a helper though, so I would still be able to do things that admins can do, though like I said I'm not active here so if someone was to ask me to get involved in something I probably wouldn't be able to because of not knowing what's going on. So if you could remove my sysop status that would be sweet, thanks.--Richardtalk 23:35, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

And could you do the same on Mischievous Makers? Thanks.--Richardtalk 23:42, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Survey link

Hey Clarinet Hawk. I wanted to bring your attention to this forum topic I just made regarding a link to a survery I had to add. I posted it in the forum, instead of here, since SmashWiki has such a large and active community. JoePlay (talk) 23:38, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

There's been a change in plans. =) We would like to ask for permission to add a link for a gaming survey on the wiki until March 2nd. Obviously, the more people that see it, the better. We would like a small link on the main page, but if you can suggest another placement, we would love to hear it. Please reply on my talk page at your earliest convenience. Thanks. JoePlay (talk) 20:20, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Street Fighter Wiki and Soulcalibur Wiki already link to SmashWiki in the Related Communities section on the sidebar, but Mortal Kombat, Dead or Alive and Tekken do not, so I'll put a link on those wikis. Plus, we will add a SmashWiki spotlight image to the Wikia Spotlight rotation. Is that cool? JoePlay (talk) 23:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
I noticed you've been logged in yesterday and today after I posted my last message, so I'll take your non-response to mean that you're OK with the deal. I just added the survey link to the News section on the main page. Again, it only runs through March 2nd, so you guys can take it down at the stroke of mignight that day. =) As per our agreement, I added a link to SmashWiki on all the fighting game wikis that didn't already link here. I also made a Wikia Spotlight for SmashWiki that will be added to the rotation today. Thanks for your cooperation! JoePlay (talk) 16:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Sounds great. Sorry about not getting back to you. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 18:08, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Quick question

Hey. So, you nailed a machinima article I wrote recently on the premise of advertising. I'm just wondering, what set that article apart from, say, Smashtasm to make it an advertisement? I'm not contesting your decision, it's just that I'm relatively new to wikis, so I'm not entirely sure of all the regulations yet...--Meta-Kirb (talk) 18:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

The problem with that article was that it wasn't about a notable machinima, and to be frank, it wasn't even a machinima. It was mostly some scrub trying to tell everyone they're cheap if they play to actually win the games. We don't have articles on each and every strategy guide, and even if we did, that wouldn't get an article because it was less of a strategy guide and more of someone trying to impose their artificial rules into the game. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 18:56, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
K, makes sense. To be honest, I never actually thought of it as a "serious" strategy guide, I just thought it was a good laugh. Thanks!--Meta-Kirb (talk) 23:10, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Maki Maki: I emailed you a quick question about the DHC page, couldnt find much contact information here. please write back soon.--User:Makimaki (talk) 11:48, 25 February 2009

Taunt

I have to say, I'm constantly unimpressed with your actions, especially considering that you're an admin. Regardless of anything else, the information you deleted from "custom taunt" had merit, and should've been merged with taunt, as was suggested on the page, and in SW guidelines. Please recover and merge the information; as I am now no longer able to do so.

-Rather than simply retorting, I would ask that you actually do the right thing in this instance. -If not, you could at least be a little nicer about it, for once. Zixor (talk) 16:15, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

The information there obviously wasn't going to merit it's own page. There also was not anywhere near enough information for it to be problematic to expect someone to recreate as a foot note on the taunt page. I can practically remember word for word the entire page as it is, and I looked at it once and deleted it. Also, if you thought it should be merged, go ahead and do it. On the whole, I'm getting tired of you going onto talk pages and saying "Shouldn't blah happen?" Go ahead and do it. If people don't like it, it will get reverted, no harm done. And if you don't have the time to do what you are proposing (which I doubt is the case), then why do you expect everyone else to jump right on it. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 16:20, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Because unilateral decisions, especially large ones, are fail. The template says suggest for a reason- it's there to incite discussion. Maybe this case is minor enough that discussion wasn't necessary, but the principle is still there. And then, after you've deleted the page, there's nowhere else to go except to other admins, which doesn't make sense, since you deleted the page. Assuming that people will remember what was in the page is dumb, and if it wasn't a problem to move the note why didn't you when you deleted the page? :/ --Shadowcrest 20:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

supporting is wrong now??

I'm trying to support you and Rita. Zixor seems to think everything should go his way, and I could have sworn that that is unacceptable here. He keeps bothering her about the image even though a conclusion has already been met. Come on, you can't not be annoyed by his actions. Blue Ninjakoopa 16:58, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I wish everything would go my way and frequently see to it that it does. Is that a crime? --Shadowcrest 21:08, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
I know slashing that comment was inappropriate, but hear me out. This helps me ignore Shadowcrest so I won't react violently and/or troll him. He's been doing things like that since my ban in January ended. Blue Ninjakoopa 22:43, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
I have removed the striking, as you have pretty much no grounds to support it with.
That was a pretty direct response to "Zixor seems to think everything should go his way, and I could have sworn that that is unacceptable here." I think everything should go my way. He is free to argue about it as long as he wishes, as long as he can actually argue the points and not just bring up old ones or go "no ur rong lolqq". As long as actual argument continues, a conclusion hasn't been met. (Note: This may or may not apply directly to this case, but I'm arguing on principle.)
"Come on, you can't not be annoyed by his actions." That should not factor into anything logical, pretty much ever. Appeals to emotion = fail.
It's true that Zixor should not reupload the image or any such until the argument is settled. But somehow, I don't think that's what you're getting at. --Shadowcrest 23:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Isn't that all you needed to say, instead of making me look stupid? Oh, and you could have left out the part about "fail". I can call Gargomon a genius and it's counted as a PA but you can tell me that I fail? That's loldumb. Blue Ninjakoopa 23:12, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
It was not my intention to make you feel stupid. I thought that my first reply was clear enough to get my point across.
Incompatible comparison. You called gargomon a 'genius' (though it is still unsure whether you actually meant such a thing), I called appeals to emotion (which are a logical fallacy anyway) fail. You said someone was fail, I said something was fail. --Shadowcrest 23:25, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Internet emotion is fail in general :\ Blue Ninjakoopa 23:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Unnecessary Comments

Can anyone delete a rude statement made by vandals? I want to make all the pages "clean" (if that doesn't offend you). SapphireKirby777 ~Behold! -.- 20:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Censorship is bad, and evidence is never a good thing to remove. If a vandal creates a page with just a mean comment then it'll probably be deleted, but if they just post on someone's talk page I don't think we should go out of our way. You're welcome to do it on your own talk page if that's what you're asking about, but as far as other's talks are concerned you should leave that up to them. --Shadowcrest 20:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Oh...I see. I should INFORM an admin about this instead of deleting it (due to the fact that an admin will have a tough time finding the original evidence of a vandalism in a page if a non-admin user erased it). I get it. Sorry about that, I went stupid... SapphireKirby777 ~Behold! -.- 20:59, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
It has nothing to do with being an admin :/ --Shadowcrest 21:03, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Does his mother watch everything he does or something? :( Blue Ninjakoopa 21:17, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Er...no BNK. However, LOL on the comment. I just want to know what to do without getting in trouble on this wiki. SapphireKirby777 ~Behold! -.- 13:58, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

On 216.54.120.67

I suspect that we have a bot on a proxy, which would explain the recurrence, though I can't explain why it would target only one or two users. Either that, or a complete idiot... --Sky (t · c · w) 02:31, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

That IP has been used for that exact kind of vandalism before. I have a feeling that our friend either has a limited number of IPs, or there's some problems finding a new one. I recommend that we perma every last one of them that he's used. It's getting seriously old. Semicolon (talk) 05:15, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

SW:NOTE

Which doesn't make him notable. He needs to have placed very well at a high quality tournament. --Sky (t · c · w) 01:09, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

irc

do want --Shadowcrest 19:04, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Severely tempted

...to ban the "Wikia" user. I don't like the auto-welcome is does for IPs, and it also signs its comments automatically as a random sysop, not as itself. What do you think? Miles (talk) 21:02, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I already mentioned it to him on IRC. He said he'll deal with it... --Shadowcrest 21:11, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

On a side note, Smoreking's waited quite a while... Miles (talk) 02:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Frankly, considering the comments/votes I've gotten, it won't be an easy decision. I'm fine with waiting another month as long as it's an honest decision by CH and not rushed.Smoreking(T) (c) 22:16, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

character page vandal

Who keeps adding stuff to the character pages. He's reusing the same IPs. If we perma them all, we could end him for good. Check the contributions of the IPs he's done it with. I'm sick of it, and we could put an end to it. What do you think? Semicolon (talk) 02:08, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

What if they're public computers though? That prevents good faith users from using them. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 20:25, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
The short answer is that I don't care tbh. The long answer is that those computers have never made a good-faith IP edit, so I doubly don't care. Semicolon (talk) 20:54, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Then wtb a long answer, because I don't like the short answer. Conservapedia is the place to ban those liberal IPs, not SmashWiki. l2agf --Shadowcrest 22:24, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
no u Blue Ninjakoopa 22:36, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't care if you don't like the short answer, tbh, and I don't know what 'wtb' means, so I'm just going to put it this way: It doesn't matter if they're public computers. They may not be public computers. They are being used for consistent, repeat, and disruptive vandalism. This is grounds for banning, in fact, it may be grounds for permanent banning, but I want to run it by the powers that be first. We don't ban accounts because of the possibility of vandalism, and likewise we don't unban accounts because of the possibility of good faith edits. We ban accounts and IPs because of what they do. In this case, these IPs have never done anything good, and have always done the same sort of vandalism. I don't understand why you're fighting me on this, Shadowcrest. To defend this vandalism is just plain ridiculous. Semicolon (talk) 22:57, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

No one's defending vandalism, Semicolon. If you perma-ban the IP's, then unblock them at a later date, it will convince the vandal to drop the idea, because he thinks he has been perma-banned. However, unbanning him later, without giving an inclination of the unbanning, will still allow good faith users in the future. That is, of course, providing that they are public computers. Just an idea. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 23:22, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.