GuildWiki

GuildWiki has been locked down: anonymous editing and account creation are disabled. Current registered users are unaffected. Leave any comments on the Community Portal.

READ MORE

GuildWiki
Don't have an account?
Register
Register
GuildWiki
GuildWiki
19,336
pages

Talk: Entropy/Archive 25

Back to page
Edit source
Line 305: Line 305:
 
::::Ok, then what's Rollback, what's the red exclamation marks on RC, and I still don't understand what RawDump is?--[[Image:Marcopolo47 signature new.jpg]] ([[User talk:Marcopolo47|Talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Marcopolo47|Contr.]]) 15:55, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
  
::::Ok, then what's Rollback, what's the red exclamation marks on RC, and I still don't understand what RawDump is?--[[Image:Marcopolo47 signature new.jpg]] ([[User talk:Marcopolo47|Talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Marcopolo47|Contr.]]) 15:55, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 
:::::Also, is there any way to view a deleted picture without restoring it?--[[Image:Marcopolo47 signature new.jpg]] ([[User talk:Marcopolo47|Talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Marcopolo47|Contr.]]) 17:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
  
:::::Also, is there any way to view a deleted picture without restoring it?--[[Image:Marcopolo47 signature new.jpg]] ([[User talk:Marcopolo47|Talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Marcopolo47|Contr.]]) 17:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
  +
::::::Rollback allows you to undo all of the edits made by the last user, up until the last edit by someone else. So if I make 7 edits to a page and you click rollback then all those 7 edits will disappear. Very handy for dealing with vandals.
  +
::::::The red exclamation marks show that an edit has not been marked as patrolled yet. We've never really used the feature here! <span style="font-family: Georgia, serif"><small>&lt;[[User:LordBiro|LordBiro]]&gt;/&lt;[[User_talk:LordBiro|Talk]]&gt;</small></span> 19:18, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:18, 9 December 2007


User:Entropy/templates/Master Template

Messagebox info NOTE: It is currently 03:19 UTC, Friday the 19 of April, 2024. My timezone is UTC - 8 hours. Have a nice day!
Archives
Archive

Archives

  1. /Archive 1
  2. /Archive 2
  3. /Archive 3
  4. /Archive 4
  5. /Archive 5
  6. /Archive 6
  7. /Archive 7
  8. /Archive 8
  9. /Archive 9
  10. /Archive 10
  11. /Archive 11
  12. /Archive 12
  13. /Archive 13
  14. /Archive 14
  15. /Archive 15


Rate-a-user

Favoured:

  1. Nice user boxes, lol so many userboxes, keep it up. -- "Wings" 02:44, 26 February 2007 (CST)
    can you please sign my talk page, no one has signed it yet *crys*
  2. <3 –Ichigo724Ichigo-signature 20:29, 1 March 2007 (CST)
  3. the userboxes...o.O --InfestedHydralisk 08:48, 3 March 2007 (CST)
  4. Hurrah! Defiant Elements (talk ~ contribs)
  5. Heretics forever, vetted Smiting build FTW! --Gimmethegepgun 21:36, 12 March 2007 (CDT)
    I present a userbox, unfortunately it's a little big :/ --Gimmethegepgun 19:15, 13 March 2007 (CDT)
    Hehe, clever. It is a bit big, though. :\ Also the colors need a bit of tweaking. A link that's already been clicked on is purple, and so is the background, so it is slightly hard to read. Good icon choice though. :) Entropy Sig (T/C) 11:31, 18 March 2007 (CDT)
  6. Needs some skill changes, and attributes are all wrong. What's with the... Oh. It's entropy. Nm, just favored. :) NightAngel 01:19, 13 March 2007 (CDT)
  7. Nice page girl [i wanted to say > nice page man XD ] its gd to see that some girls are playing guild wars. and i belive you =] Korineczek 13:01, 15 March 2007 (CDT)
  8. Diligent contributor and a welcome vet, but needs to work on keeping a cooler head :) GrammarNazi 18:14, 26 March 2007 (CDT)
  9. Clap clap clap - APPLAUSE! - Standing Ovation! Very Helpful. TehleetFORDsig AmericanVlad 21:52, 26 March 2007 (CDT)
    I am sensing some sarcasm...or maybe it's just me... Entropy Sig (T/C) 01:36, 18 April 2007 (CDT)
    lolol, i read standing ovulation:P —ShadyGuy Shadyguysig 13:52, 11 August 2007 (CDT)
  10. Very amusing *muhahaha* Now where is the money you promised for voting? Readem (talk*contribs) 01:10, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
  11. Great page, lol. Sirocco 23:54, 8 April 2007 (CDT)
  12. Yay!—Cheese Cheese Slaya (Talk) 13:12, 9 April 2007 (CDT)
  13. I like to vote for things without giving reasons. Woot! --Rollerzerris <!--Zerris--> 02:07, 18 April 2007 (CDT)
  14. ZOMG! A INTWRWUB GURL!!! HAZX!!! Canada 39x40 Thedarkmarine 20:21, 25 April 2007 (CDT)
    What? I don't understand a word you said... Entropy Sig (T/C) 20:24, 25 April 2007 (CDT)
    I'll translate to the best of my abilities. Granted, I MAY be paraphrasing: "A girl on the internet? Holy s--- how is it possible? Oh the horror!" *faints* --Gimmethegepgun 20:27, 25 April 2007 (CDT)
    Hehe...you're making me blush in RL. Not all of us live on MySpace you know! Besides...User:Lania Elderfire, User:Bexor, User:Honorable Sarah...etc. Entropy Sig (T/C) 20:33, 25 April 2007 (CDT)
    <Head Asplodes> Canada 39x40 Thedarkmarine 22:41, 25 April 2007 (CDT)
    Translation: "She Knows I Exist! Gasp!" --Rollerzerris <!--Zerris--> 22:43, 25 April 2007 (CDT)
    Rules Of The Internet, Rule 30: "There are no girls on the internet"Jennalee 06:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
    That includes you too, then :D Entropy Sig (T/C) 06:53, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
    Well, following that, what are you and I then? Fembots? Traps? :P Jennalee 09:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
    I just found out what that means, and I'll take that as a compliment, I guess... :) Entropy Sig (T/C) 07:28, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  15. So many userboxes. Inspiring! =D Thoughtful 20:12, 9 May 2007 (CDT)
  16. Yay, userboxes! Yay, helping me get my signature! Yay, hopefully painting me an icon for my skill! Yay Chaos! ThePaintballer sig19crop The Paintballer (T/C)
  17. She insulted RA. —ǥȓɩηɔɧ〚₮/ḉ〛 13:33, 7 August 2007 (CDT)
    Woot to that! --Gimmethegepgun 07:57, 8 August 2007 (CDT)
    Hehe ;) Entropy Sig (T/C) 01:50, 9 August 2007 (CDT)
  18. lol, i like your life userbox Entropy ;-)--Talos of Flanders 18:25, 12 August 2007 (CDT)
  19. Thanks for your speedy response to the Frostmaw Burrows issue. I was happy with the outcome of the confrontation, and its good to see that there are people here who can take a third party view on an issue and make a decision. The Black Leach 04:24, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
  20. Kinda nice page i can say, and your comments -->ftw<-- [meant good] Also userboxes rocks =] --Korineczek 15:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
    You voted twice! Entropy Sig (T/C) 01:31, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
  21. One of the few guildwikieans on my list of people I would feel insulted if hit by a warrior frenzy-healsig besides rellik, readem and some other people. This is actually a complement, despite what I said seems like a contradiction. Oh, insert Hobson's choice request for more AB here. Flechette 10:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
  22. I am indecisive, so I get to sign all three categories.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 19:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
  23. Has 2 amazing userboxes, the tiger one and the phailing life one. Bravo. --Shadowcrest 19:23, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
  24. Dunno, just seem to like you instinctively.--El Nazgir 21:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
  25. Awesome. End of story. Entrea Sumatae Entrea Sumatae 02:19, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
  26. UB3R K00L and this wiki is in desperate need of more admins. Also WARNING: This page is 37 kilobytes long; some browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32kb. Please consider breaking the page into smaller sections. --Hellbringer (T/C) 22:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


Unfavoured:

  1. How dare you insult Random Arena! Solus Shield of Judgment 23:03, 3 March 2007 (CST)
    RA isn't serious PvP! Entropy Sig (T/C) 21:45, 12 March 2007 (CDT)
  2. RA ftw! --SigmA 11:45, 4 March 2007 (CST)
    RA is almost worse than "1v1"! Entropy Sig (T/C) 21:45, 12 March 2007 (CDT)
    1 vs 1 ftw!!! XD lol Readem (talk*contribs) 20:32, 4 April 2007 (CDT)
  3. Heretic! Needs more RA. --Beautiful Gae 18:26, 4 March 2007 (CST)
  4. Bad vetting Jups 15:42, 11 March 2007 (CDT)
    Proven inexperienced player who argues poorly. Entropy Sig (T/C) 21:45, 12 March 2007 (CDT)
    Don't worry...everyone knows Jupusto sucks at making builds and hates people for unfavoring his old builds...He even said D.E. gave noobish build comments!—Cheese Cheese Slaya (Talk) 20:27, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
    I own. anyhow check my user page pleeze people who hate me Jups 11:23, 13 March 2007 (CDT)
    Mmm hmm. I can see that I'm not the only one who doesn't like you. Taken for breaking GW:NPA in build vetting? Tsk, tsk... Entropy Sig
  5. Umm, you're mean to me? Jagre 01:27, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
    Odd reason for a Favored vote. Entropy Sig (T/C) 01:33, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
    it was an accident lol. Jagre 01:29, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
  6. You're awesome, btut his is the best place to quote some user: "Meepmeep, unfavored 'cause I can. -The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cheese Slaya or perhaps Readem
    Pwned! Anon IP ftl Entropy Sig (T/C) 22:04, 19 April 2007 (CDT)
    Btw, that is my friend User:Blastedt you quoted. Pwn't again. Entropy Sig (T/C) 22:17, 19 April 2007 (CDT)
    Actually Entropy, I remember quite clearly saying that. When I didn't have an account, and was signing like dis ~Readem :P Readem (talk*contribs) 15:57, 23 June 2007 (CDT)
    O rly? I went to the anon's contribs and saw a lot to Cheese Slaya's personal page, I think...or something like that...so I figured it was him. If you say so, though, then I dunno. I suppose by now it is not an IP you use so I guess we will never know, hehe. :) In any case I fixed the tag. Entropy Sig (T/C) 16:08, 23 June 2007 (CDT)
    "Meepmeep, unfavored cuz I can :P" Readem (talk*contribs) 16:01, 23 June 2007 (CDT)
    Lulz, bit late now :) Entropy Sig (T/C) 16:08, 23 June 2007 (CDT)
  7. I am indecisive, so I get to sign all three categories.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 19:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


Delete/Ban:

  1. 5 day penalty for taking so long to put up character images and forgetting the name of your Ritualist. >< Entropy 22:15, 24 January 2007 (CST)
  2. Has too long of a talk page, "WARNING: This page is 63 kilobytes long; some browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32kb. Please consider breaking the page into smaller sections." -anonymous
  3. Deltete! —BlastedtSigleftBlastedtBlastedtSigright— 10:11, 4 February 2007 (CST)
  4. Dont like her, *bans* Shadow Of Shinra 11:52, 9 February 2007 (PST)
  5. Needs a lot more userboxes!!!--Lania ElderfireMy Talk 02:05, 26 February 2007 (CST)
  6. NOT ENOUGH TEMPLATES! :P --Gimmethegepgun 22:20, 26 February 2007 (CST)
  7. Because you won't marry me --Blue.rellik 22:54, 13 September 2007 (CDT)
    I lol'd. Entropy Sig (T/C) 23:06, 13 September 2007 (CDT)
  8. NEADS MOAR ARCHIVES!!! (squish!)--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 13:39, 22 September 2007 (CDT)
  9. Cuz you're an admin and I ain't :'( ShadyGuySigByMe 16:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
  10. Sure, why not. — Nova Neo-NovaSmall — (contribs) 23:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


First Lord Belar 02:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Second?--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 02:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
third Cress Arvein 02:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
fourth. --Hellbringer loves emo slut druggies (T/C) 02:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
fifth. ECs ftl --Shadowcrest 02:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you all for helping fight the vandal(s). GuildWiki couldn't function without you. Entropy Sig (T/C) 02:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Dang, I missed all the fun!--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 02:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
You can watch RC for any new IPs posting to my or Hell's talk and ban them. I need a minute to check for missed damages. Entropy Sig (T/C) 02:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
(2xEC)It could, but it would end up looking like myspace. Lord Belar 02:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
you wish IP. and so true belar--Shadowcrest 02:15, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Yikes, that's a scary thought, Belar.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 02:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for keeping my talk page clean o.O - I could probably hazard a guess to who random IP is this time but I doubt it'd be very constructive. Jennalee 02:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Another angry SodM member? >.> Entropy Sig (T/C) 02:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
SodM? Lord Belar 02:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Nop, I don't think the majority of our members are inclined to behave immaturely, but someone else who was more recent around here. Viper should know *cough* Jennalee 02:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, if you want more targets for banhammer, see User talk:Ravenjwolfe and then Special:Contributions/64.20.53.18. Jennalee 17:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
No. Ban imminent Cress Arvein 02:38, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

(RI) Heh, to quote this page's history notes - "soz to Gem, Entrea, Shadowcrest, and Hell. Mr. Vandal: I do not like you. I do not respect you. You are unworthy to even post on my talkpage".(and, er, <snip!> ;) - What about me? I even reverted your user page and almost got RSI thanks to Mr IP. Don't I get no admin-love? Hehe --SnogratUser Snograt signature 13:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

i got RSI. do i get admin-love?--Mr Ex Vandal 23:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure you want it, lol. I quote:

"Banning is my way of showing affection, honey. I'll belive you're a changed person if you stop using proxy IPs. :) Entropy Sig (T/C) 02:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)" --Shadowcrest 23:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I <3 being banned, it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. --Mr Ex Vandal 23:28, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey

Please stop banning me. I am a changed person. I am not vandalizing pages. And I love you very much.

Hey, look, a flying pig! Lord Belar 02:19, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
for some strange reason I find both those statements hard to believe... --Shadowcrest 02:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm Cress Arvein 02:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Banning is my way of showing affection, honey. I'll belive you're a changed person if you stop using proxy IPs. :) Entropy Sig (T/C) 02:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
(Fucking EC)There could be a reason for that... Lord Belar 02:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Banning is how you show your affection? God damnit, and I thought you loved me --Blue.rellik 02:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Masochistic calling for the banstick are we? Jennalee 02:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
She must love IPs a lot rofl. I <3 Entropy banning. --Hellbringer loves emo slut druggies (T/C) 02:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
No, Hell. You ♥ Emo Slut-Druggies.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 02:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh yeah. Forgot about that. --Hellbringer loves emo slut druggies (T/C) 02:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


Ugh, what a day. I can't believe how much work it is to be an admin sometimes. It just makes me appreciate people like Karlos and Skuld and Gares and Gem and...yeah, all the old admins. It makes me appreciate them more now that I know some of what they went through all the time. I really miss them. :( Thanks again everyone... /signoff Entropy Sig (T/C) 03:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Crazy day, eh? Wish we had all of those big-hitters that you mentioned still with us, too. --Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 03:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Woot lets do that again lol. Pull out those banhammers like crazy. --Hellbringer loves emo slut druggies (T/C) 03:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, pick a random person tomorrow and ban them. I nominate you. :P Lord Belar 03:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
But Gem is back. — Nova Neo-NovaSmall — (contribs) 23:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
lol if you want there to be more admins i'll volunteer. I was just looking at the active admin list and realized just how short it is. ^_^ —♥Jedi♥Rogue♥ 23:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
ME + MP will bash and win over you all! Mwahahahahahahhaha.... Umm... Hi? -- Gem (gem / talk) 23:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Good thing...

...you don't care about GWW, because Raptor stole your name over there. Your alter-ego is now a vandal's sock-puppet. Entropy on GuildWiki = everyone's favorite admin. Entropy on Guild Wars Wiki = loathed. Just thought that was kind of funny. Entrea SumataeEntrea Sumatae [Talk] 00:34, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

UNFAIR

Quote from User_talk:Mr_Ex_Vandal: "It only took so long because, technically, the ban isnt protected under policy. But for that much BS, besically we just said "f*ck policy" and banned him. --Shadowcrest 02:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC)"
That sounds unfair. :( --194.54.189.173 02:07, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair has nothing to do with it. Admins can do whatever they want, whenever they want, and you can't do anything about it. --Macros 02:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Who cares? It's another Raptors. And I don't trust you, considering you showed up right after I banned him, and your only edit is about him. Same goes for the IP who posted the exact same message on Gem's talk page.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 02:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
GW:YAV --85.25.141.60 02:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
GW:ADMIN --Macros 02:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
GW:YAV --195.141.76.131 02:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Vandals are not. --Shadowcrest 02:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
I never said that your opinion doesn't matter, I simply stated I don't trust many IPs right now.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 02:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
And, IP, whoever you are, this is thte second vandalism filled night in a row, by mainly IPs. You picked a bad time to act mysteriously. --Shadowcrest 02:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
WTF? ARE YOU RETARDED OR WHAT? ITS OBVIOUSLY ME -.- --195.141.76.131 02:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
For the last time: FUCK OFF. YOU ARE NO LONGER WELCOME HERE. Lord Belar 02:16, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah fuck off and stop infaming us anons!! 169.231.5.83 02:17, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Changing ips doesn't help. Lord Belar 02:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
And it's defame, not infame. Lord Belar 02:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Infame - Learn english. --62.129.164.190 02:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
"Infame: To defame" Read your own links. Lord Belar 02:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
YEAH AND INFAME IS CORRECT TOO. SO STFU :] --85.25.141.60 02:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
srsly--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 02:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Shush and leave the wiki. for good, IP. --Shadowcrest 02:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow, much of this is just trolling. Please tell me you're going to get rid of this whole section, Entropy?--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 02:26, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Wanna hide that you banned an user for breaking NO policy, huh? Nice :)
Well, I gotta sleep so good night. Se you tomorrow! --169.231.5.83 02:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Not rlly. I just think that this whole section is pointless to keep, and doesn't really show a good community to any new users looking on this page.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 02:29, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
We'll see. Nite!
Honestly, IP, NO ONE is going to back you up on this one. In fact, show me 10 people on the wiki who will believe you who are not sock puppets, and I'll leave you alone. Which leads me to my next point; sockpuppetry can get you banned. --Shadowcrest 02:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Yep, it can. Oh, wait, IT JUST DID. Lord Belar 02:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
God I'm getting sick of all this shit.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 02:34, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
With the exception of the vandal, we all are. Lord Belar 02:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Poor Entropy, all this crap always happens on her page. --Shadowcrest 02:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
There should be a User talk:Entropy/Real talk, so all the shit can go here, and the conversations can continue undisturbed. Lord Belar 02:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Actually, that's not so bad of an idea. The only thing for me would be its harder to get to, but if I had all this vandal crap going on my talk, I'd probably do that. --Shadowcrest 02:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
For what it's worth ... this wiki isn't the GWW, and not bound by the same policy mistakes over there that handcuff their sysops over there into being little more than glorified janitors.
On this wiki, per policy: Administrators can ban users at will. This is usually done in cases of vandalism, and permanent bans are usually reserved for spambots. However, if an administrator feels it prudent, he may remove a user from the wiki for any reason, or no reason at all.. If someone is being a disruptive force on this wiki - they can and should be banned. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 05:55, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Personally I didn't see the account MR Ex Vandal disturbing. The IPs are a lot more disturbing. So I'm unbanning the account in hoipes of getting him back to it instead of multiple IPs. -- Gem (gem / talk) 10:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
I wasn't commenting on the bans themselves - I haven't reviewed the posts myself - I'm not an admin, so I'll leave that task to those who are ;-) I was just pointing out the policy line above, because there seemed to be debate on if the bans could be done. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:03, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Ok. :) I wasn't commenting to anyone specifically either, it was just an announcement for anyone who thought that the unbanning was weird. -- Gem (gem / talk) 22:03, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


What the hell were you people thinking? -.- I stand by Gem's decision on this one... It's true, that I banned a lot of random IPs also a few nights ago. To argue my side, it was obvious that they were the same person. We don't have a GW:SOCK but I felt justified since it was clear the vandal was simply using alternate IPs to continue and harrass the Wiki.

Now, when Mr. Ex Vandal was created, I stated on his talkpage that I didn't particularly care for his style of editing, especially his not-quite-bannable disrespect for GW:RFA and other users, but at the same time if he was truly of a mind to reform I would welcome him with open arms as much as possible. People can change, sometimes drastically, and you have to take their word for it until evidence proves otherwise. If Mr. Ex Vandal had actually broken a policy, then yes, he would deserve a ban. But "baiting" other users or admins into making fools of themselves is not a bannable offense. You people chose to say what you did, not because Mr. Ex Vandal made you say it, but because that is how you actually felt.

I have tried over and over again to advocate respect and tolerance towards anons and fringe users of the Wiki (User talk:NanoWarrior, User talk:Mr Ex Vandal, User talk:Lost-Blue when he was still an anon), because you can judge a community not by how it treats those best off (err...not Gravewit in this case >.>), but by how it treats those most disadvantaged or unliked. It is true that I go all-out and pretty much break GW:NPA when dealing with vandals. "Fuck off" is certainly not a constructive summary for banning. However, those sorts of times, I have made absolutely certain that I really am banning a vandal, one who has showed contempt and disrespect for our policies and the Wiki in general. I am not necessarily saying that it is okay to sink to their level, but GW:YAV does not cover vandals who will return your insults word for word given half a chance...that would be overextention of a policy, using it for something it was not intended for.

But, even though we pretty much go by vigilante justice here, we do have standards. We have guidelines for what is a bannable offense and what is not. We do not abuse GW:ADMIN for our own selfish purposes, and say "Admins can do whatever they want" to justify an otherwise uncalled for ban. We look for evidence before banning someone - why do you think admins are reminded to check the contribs before banning? To put it plainly, we have a great priviledge called administrative discretion, and when that gets abused I start to seriously consider whether we ought to have it. Perhaps GWW is in the right, after all. It is very sad to say so, but maybe we do need to have policies defining everything. If people cannot use their own good judgment to make decisions any more (and I am not just talking about Marcopolo here), then we should be stripped of that power.

  • Innocent until proven guilty
  • Admins have the same amount of clout as normal users
  • Preemtive bans are unacceptable (User:Raptors is an extraordinary exception)

Is it really so hard to follow these simple rules?

I am disappointed in all of you, but especially myself for not being a good enough role model. Entropy Sig (T/C) 08:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

One thing to point out, Raptors had already continually harrassed Ryudo on the other wiki, and then came here when he got banned to continue to harass him. Is that not a bannable offense? As well as circumventing a ban, as Mr Ex Vandal did multiple times?--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 16:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Gigathrash

Marcopolo broke something (someone?) and doesn't know how to fix it.--Carmine 05:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Problem fixed, I'm not banned anymore =D (long story)--Gigathrash sig GigathrashTalk^Cont 01:29, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Eivittu perkele saatana

Gods, I leave the wiki for one night, and all this has to happen again? I have a real life, too :( I'm sorry that I can't deal with things right now, but hopefully there will be time over the weekend. I apologize for my spotty attendance record of late, and would like to thank Marcopolo for taking up the slack where I leave off. Entropy Sig (T/C) 14:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Heehee, that's probably more than can be said for some of us ;p - maybe you should consider removing that userbox, you know which one Jennalee 14:48, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Why finnish?? Falafel 18:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
It's the only language that can truly express my frustration at the moment. Entropy Sig (T/C) 08:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

...

See my userpage plz.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 00:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Marco, just because you let one guy get to you and make you break like 15 policies isnt a cause to go and delete your userpage! Anyway, GW:RFA ftw. EDIT: my new sig ftw as well.. --Warwick sig Warwick (Talk) (Contr.) (My RFA! (vote support) 07:43, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Fuck. And no, Warwick, I don't think you're qualified. You are just not experienced enough. Though I do appreciate the gesture - it shows you care about the Wiki and want to help out. Entropy Sig (T/C) 08:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Z0mg entropy, was that a Personal Attack against MP47? =O --Warwick sig Warwick (Talk) (Contr.) (My RFA! (vote support) 08:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Not in a joking mood at the moment. Fuck is a general way of expressing exasperation and discontent. Entropy Sig (T/C) 08:11, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
I know, it was intended as a joke.. Whats wrong? Anything i can help with? I'm bored enough to do almost anything.. --Warwick sig Warwick (Talk) (Contr.) (My RFA! (vote support) 08:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, other than the fact that I'm posting at midnight and have bad sickness in RL - you could start with reading what I posted above, and perhaps Marcopolo's talkpage as well, and surmise from that that I am not very happy at the moment. Entropy Sig (T/C) 08:15, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Okay, okay.. Geez, dont get stroppy.. I was only trying to help.. --Warwick sig Warwick (Talk) (Contr.) (My RFA! (vote support) 08:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
...Stroppy? Entropy Sig (T/C) 08:22, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
well.. yeah.. --Warwick sig Warwick (Talk) (Contr.) (My RFA! (vote support) 08:23, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
What does that mean? I have never heard the term before. Entropy Sig (T/C) 08:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Annoyed/Irritated for no particularly good reason. --Warwick sig Warwick (Talk) (Contr.) (My RFA! (vote support) 08:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Wiki collapsing isn't a particularly good reason to be annoyed/irritated?...I'm not annoyed with you. Entropy Sig (T/C) 08:34, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh, okay. Then your being perfectly reasonable ^_^ --Warwick sig Warwick (Talk) (Contr.) (My RFA! (vote support) 08:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Will spam cheer you up?

It used to...--Gigathrash sig GigathrashTalk^Cont 08:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I actually dislike spam if it clogs up RC, but otherwise I don't mind it. Moar archives is always a good thing, innit? Entropy Sig (T/C) 10:05, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
I'll do a pyramid, in one edit:O. Yay for templates.

User:Gigathrash/templates/Talkpyramid The one problem is I can't make it sign every line with the person using it :/.--Gigathrash sig GigathrashTalk^Cont 10:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey, that's a template? Interesting concept...I wonder if I could get it to work. Entropy Sig (T/C) 10:47, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
That's much better. It was certainly getting on my craw when the spam crew were living up to their name --Blue.rellik 10:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

WTF

taken from Raptors' usertalk on GWW

Hey

I like you. I think you know that. I don't know who your socks are and I don't really care. If you're still vandalizing/whatever, you're failing to make whatever point you're trying to make. If you're not still doing that, sweet. In either case, you'll do a ton better if you just make a new account, never mention you're Raptors, and start fresh. I for one quite appreciate your insight into the nature of the wiki, but the only way you'll ever make a point is to discuss it.

Even if nobody agrees with you, you'll make more of an impact with some discussion than you will with vandalism/policy violations. Look at User:Karlos for verification of that.

—Tanaric 09:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

As a sysop, is it prudent to encourage the most infamously banned user in this wiki's history to circumvent his block? -elviondale (tahlk) 10:34, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Meh, if he does no harm, then I don't think going past a block matters :P — ク Eloc 貢 10:45, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


What the hell, Tanaric? I once respected you. FFS, this is yet another reason for me to never go to GWW. Entropy Sig (T/C) 10:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't presume that Tanaric's opinion reflects anyone else's on GWW. <LordBiro>/<Talk> 11:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Wow --Blue.rellik 11:10, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm not, Biro...but this is extremely troubling to me. Admins/sysops are supposed to serve as role models for the community, and even though Tanaric's or Eloc's personal opinions may not reflect anyone else's on GWW, it is sad nonetheless. "What sorts of evil must lurk in their hearts to spur them on?" (Confessor Dorian) Entropy Sig (T/C) 11:30, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Hey- I'm Elviondale from GWW. The convo seems to have moved to his user page. If you don't mind, I have changed my links for my copied comments as well. SuperStretch 14:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Didn't Raptors steal your name on GWW Entropy? lol --Macros 16:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, he did.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 16:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Darkroots daggers

I have a spare pair that I'm not using.. Want them?--Satanic llamas 11:58, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmm..

Reading through the UNFAIR section of your page, astoundingly there was a lot of trolling going on- i think that almost all of the people who posted there deserve a (temporary) ban.. =/ --Warwick sig Warwick (Talk) (Contr.) (My RFA! (vote support) 12:08, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree, including me...--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 14:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Shut up Marco. You already apologized via user page. Plus I tend to troll a little :D. --Hellbringer loves emo slut druggies (T/C) 15:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Me too. I regret my actions because even after all this time I still don't know when to shut up. --Macros 16:11, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Just some questions

What is Rollback? What is Patrolled? What RawDump? And, what are the red exclamation marks on RC mean?--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 15:46, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Patrolled means edits that were made by admins, RawDump I believe is where people dump raw information and have someone else put it in (don't hold that to me though) --Gimmethegepgun 15:51, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
About patrolled: Why, on new pages, does it say "Mark as patrolled" with a clickable link? What does that mean?--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 15:53, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Methinks something like "This page has been tested and approved by an adminz" (that reminds me of Duyvis commercials.) --- VipermagiSig -- (s)talkpage 15:54, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Patrolled edits can be excluded from RC(like minor edits) --Gimmethegepgun 15:55, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Ok, then what's Rollback, what's the red exclamation marks on RC, and I still don't understand what RawDump is?--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 15:55, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Also, is there any way to view a deleted picture without restoring it?--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 17:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Rollback allows you to undo all of the edits made by the last user, up until the last edit by someone else. So if I make 7 edits to a page and you click rollback then all those 7 edits will disappear. Very handy for dealing with vandals.
The red exclamation marks show that an edit has not been marked as patrolled yet. We've never really used the feature here! <LordBiro>/<Talk> 19:18, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC BY-NC-SA unless otherwise noted.