MarioWiki:Appeals/Archive 2: Difference between revisions
(archiving; overturned) |
m (Text replacement - "Appeals/Archive Template" to "Appeals/Archive/Template") |
||
(21 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{MarioWiki:Appeals/Archive/Template}} | |||
{ | |||
{ | |||
===BabyLuigiOnFire=== | ===BabyLuigiOnFire=== | ||
{{AppealOutcome|reminder|overturned|Users get a week to fix their sigs before any punitive action is taken after the initial {{tem|Sigfix}} is administered.}} | |||
*[[User talk:BabyLuigiOnFire#Reminder]] | *[[User talk:BabyLuigiOnFire#Reminder]] | ||
Line 29: | Line 13: | ||
===Mario7=== | ===Mario7=== | ||
{{AppealOutcome|last warning|amended|Reverting admin edits is not actually breaking rules in and of itself, however this user had been repeatedly spoken to about making edits like the one in question, and has been issued a regular Warning for that in place of the Last Warning.}} | |||
*[[User_talk:Mario7#Last_Warning]] | *[[User_talk:Mario7#Last_Warning]] | ||
====[[User:Mario7|Mario7]]==== | ====[[User:Mario7|Mario7]]==== | ||
Line 41: | Line 24: | ||
===The Chain Chomp=== | ===The Chain Chomp=== | ||
{{AppealOutcome|warning|stands|Antagonizing other users is not allowed, and being new is no excuse: the fact that you shouldn't be rude should be a given (besides, even after the initial warning, the user continued being confrontational and had to be warned again).}} | |||
*[[User_talk:The_Chain_Chomp#Warning]] | *[[User_talk:The_Chain_Chomp#Warning]] | ||
Line 55: | Line 37: | ||
===Baby Luigi=== | ===Baby Luigi=== | ||
{{AppealOutcome|warning|overturned|Censored swears in edit summaries aren't against rules as long as the implied swearing isn't ''at'' someone else. If the other user had a problem with it, they should have sent an informal message, rather than jumping straight to a Warning.}} | |||
*[http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Baby_Luigi&diff=1608028&oldid=1607532 My warning] | *[http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Baby_Luigi&diff=1608028&oldid=1607532 My warning] | ||
====Baby Luigi==== | ====Baby Luigi==== | ||
Line 67: | Line 48: | ||
===Mario=== | ===Mario=== | ||
{{AppealOutcome|warning|overturned|This warning makes no sense. An informal message and actually specifying what's the matter would have been better.}} | |||
*[[User talk:Mario#Warning|Mario's warning]] | *[[User talk:Mario#Warning|Mario's warning]] | ||
====Mario==== | ====Mario==== | ||
Line 79: | Line 59: | ||
===Pinkie Pie=== | ===Pinkie Pie=== | ||
{{AppealOutcome|reminder|mootpoint|The user was blocked, so it's a moot point now.}} | |||
*[[User talk:Pinkie Pie/Archive 6#Reminder 2]] | *[[User talk:Pinkie Pie/Archive 6#Reminder 2]] | ||
====Pinkie Pie==== | ====Pinkie Pie==== | ||
Line 93: | Line 71: | ||
===Viper26=== | ===Viper26=== | ||
{{AppealOutcome|reminder|overturned|The user complied with the message before removing it, and they were likely unaware of the rule against removing legit comments. An informal reminder would've been better, since this was their first offense, and it wasn't done with malicious intent.}} | |||
*[[User talk:Viper26#Reminder]] | *[[User talk:Viper26#Reminder]] | ||
====Viper26==== | ====Viper26==== | ||
Line 106: | Line 83: | ||
===[[User:BossBass|BossBass]]=== | ===[[User:BossBass|BossBass]]=== | ||
{{AppealOutcome|warning|overturned|This seemed to be a legitimate copy-paste accident on the user's part, since the spam was just part of another article's text. However, it's still important to use the preview button before editing to avoid things like this in the future.}} | |||
*[[User talk:BossBass#Warning]] | *[[User talk:BossBass#Warning]] | ||
====[[User:BossBass|BossBass]]==== | ====[[User:BossBass|BossBass]]==== | ||
Line 117: | Line 93: | ||
===TrickyMario7654=== | ===TrickyMario7654=== | ||
{{AppealOutcome|last warning|mootpoint|All points made in the warning were valid, and the user's actions couldn't just be overturned. The user was also tempblocked, so it's a moot point now.}} | |||
*[[User talk:TrickyMario7654#Last Warning|Last Warning]] | *[[User talk:TrickyMario7654#Last Warning|Last Warning]] | ||
====TrickyMario7654==== | ====TrickyMario7654==== | ||
Line 133: | Line 108: | ||
===Pwwnd123=== | ===Pwwnd123=== | ||
{{AppealOutcome|warning|stands|The user was repeatedly told to stop but kept doing it anyway, and went as far as insulting other people over it, both directly and in an edit summary. Behavior like this is completely unacceptable, and the warning stands.}} | |||
*[[User_talk:Pwwnd123/Archive 1#Warning|Warning]] | *[[User_talk:Pwwnd123/Archive 1#Warning|Warning]] | ||
====Pwwnd123==== | ====Pwwnd123==== | ||
Line 144: | Line 118: | ||
===Mario=== | ===Mario=== | ||
{{AppealOutcome|reminder|overturned|The swearing wasn't malicious or directed towards anyone, and while it wasn't a good idea, a Reminder was an overreaction.}} | |||
*[http://www.mariowiki.com/User_talk:Mario#Whoa Reminder for swearing in edit summaries] | *[http://www.mariowiki.com/User_talk:Mario#Whoa Reminder for swearing in edit summaries] | ||
====Mario==== | ====Mario==== | ||
Line 155: | Line 128: | ||
===[[User:Baby Luigi|Baby Luigi]]=== | ===[[User:Baby Luigi|Baby Luigi]]=== | ||
{{AppealOutcome|warning|overturned|Both users were at fault for edit warring, but Mario7's edits were in the wrong and Baby Luigi tried to explain as much with the edit summaries, and she certainly wasn't creating "obvious hoaxes".}} | |||
*http://www.mariowiki.com/User_talk:Baby_Luigi#Warning | *http://www.mariowiki.com/User_talk:Baby_Luigi#Warning | ||
Line 169: | Line 140: | ||
===[[User:Pwwnd123|Pwwnd123]]=== | ===[[User:Pwwnd123|Pwwnd123]]=== | ||
{{AppealOutcome|reminder|overturned|The swearing wasn't malicious or directed towards anyone, and while it wasn't a good idea, a Reminder was an overreaction.}} | |||
*http://www.mariowiki.com/User_talk:Pwwnd123#Reminder | *http://www.mariowiki.com/User_talk:Pwwnd123#Reminder | ||
====Pwwnd123==== | ====Pwwnd123==== | ||
Line 181: | Line 150: | ||
===Randombob-omb4761=== | ===Randombob-omb4761=== | ||
{{AppealOutcome|reminder|overturned|Very unnecessary.}} | |||
*[[User talk:Randombob-omb4761#I think you should get this...]] | |||
====Randombob-omb4761==== | ====Randombob-omb4761==== | ||
*I have not been editing userspace so often the last 3 months, I have over 1,000 mainspace edits and only 300 userspace edits. I don't understand why I got a userspace warning for that. It should be appealed. {{User:Randombob-omb4761/sig}} | *I have not been editing userspace so often the last 3 months, I have over 1,000 mainspace edits and only 300 userspace edits. I don't understand why I got a userspace warning for that. It should be appealed. {{User:Randombob-omb4761/sig}} | ||
Line 191: | Line 159: | ||
*Sorry' but I saw you had lots of edits to your user page. So I gave it to you. Sorry about that. Please forgive' I'm new. | *Sorry' but I saw you had lots of edits to your user page. So I gave it to you. Sorry about that. Please forgive' I'm new. | ||
---- | ---- | ||
===Stonehill=== | |||
{{AppealOutcome|reminder|overturned|It wasn't obvious that Viper26 was in the middle of an editing project, and even if it was, first-time Courtesy offences should be dealt with informally: Reminders are for major breaches or repeat offences.}} | |||
*[[User talk:Stonehill#Reminder]] | |||
====Stonehill==== | |||
*Even though I would do the same without the Reminder, and I know you posted that plan in January and would understand myself, you never made it as clear as possible. In order to prevent edit sniping in the first place, you absolutely '''''NEED''''' to state what you're planning '''as "loud and clear" as possible'''! Plus, planning something and then abandoning it for 5 days is just allowing another user to take over, which doesn't necessarily count as edit sniping. | |||
====Viper26==== | |||
*I posted that I was creating the ''[[Mario Party 10]]'' minigames back in January or so on my userpage. So what you did is edit sniping, a form of discourteous behavior, which is also a [[MarioWiki:Warning policy#Level Two Offenses|level two offense]]. I'm also just waiting for enough info on the games, and an image I can easily get off of IGN, but I think I can do it now. | |||
---- | |||
===Bazooka Mario=== | |||
{{AppealOutcome|warning|overturned|Reverting undeniably bad edits repeatedly isn't edit warring, it's quality control, especially when you do contact the other editor via talk page: if they refuse to listen, they're the one warring, and the only one deserving of a Warning.}} | |||
*[http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Bazooka_Mario&diff=1893191&oldid=1892785 Warning] | |||
====Bazooka Mario==== | |||
*I've been giving this warning for edit warring on the [[Kart]] page. Except {{User|Joey2871}} has been making blatantly incorrect and nonsense edits to the Luigi image on the page, stating that he's driving "his brother's kart" rather than the "Standard Kart". I've already told [http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Joey2871&diff=1892881&oldid=1892878 him] to knock it off and bring it into the talk page if he disagrees. But he played victim and accused ''me'' of bad faith and edit warring and continued to make these edits. He also has a given history of being a disruptive influence on [[Talk:Badwagon]] (I suspected he was this I.P. due to the same rude, juvenile, and defiant behavior while also trying to guilt-trip and play victim to people that chewed him out; he also [http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Talk:Badwagon&curid=192425&diff=1893173&oldid=1882971 lied] while [http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Talk:Badwagon&diff=next&oldid=1893197 undermining admin authority]). Given this unacceptable conduct, Joey2871 is in absolutely no position to give me a warning. In fact, ''he''{{'}}s the one who deserves the warning or even a block at this point. | |||
====Joey2871==== | |||
*[NO COMMENT] | |||
---- | |||
===Tailikku1=== | |||
{{AppealOutcome|warning|overturned|Tailikku1's translations were perfectly fine for the most part: this is just another example of Goolgenerade being unnecessarily caustic towards him.}} | |||
http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATailikku1&diff=1894701&oldid=1891154 | |||
====Tailikku1==== | |||
*He's been doing this to me for months. | |||
====Goolgenerade==== | |||
[NO COMMENT] | |||
---- | |||
==={{User|Roy Koopa}}=== | |||
{{AppealOutcome|warning|overturned|Telling someone they're breaking rules is not vandalizing their talk page in any way: this warning was a hugely inappropriate overreaction.}} | |||
*[[User talk:Roy Koopa#Warning !!|Here it is.]] | |||
====Roy Koopa==== | |||
*I'm sorry, but this warning is ridiculous. I tell him he's breaking a rule, and here he comes slapping a warning on me. He already broke a rule by giving a warning to an admin (see his talk page) and I talked to him about a seemingly needless image revert as well as the image in his sig. I told him that it was too big, and he comes back and calls me an a**hole. Rulebreaker? Yes, he basically flamed me. Then he throws a warning at me for vandalizing his talk page. Like, what did I do that earned me this? If anyone deserves a warning, it's ''him,'' not me. I'd like to also add that he has been a user for less than 24 hours, whereas I have a history of more than three years. | |||
====MarioMario456==== | |||
*[NO COMMENT] | |||
---- | |||
==={{User|Fawful's Minion}}=== | |||
{{AppealOutcome|warning|stands|Although posting on talk pages of inactive users is not explicitly disallowed according to the policy pages, you did {{plain link|1=[http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Talk:Poop&diff=prev&oldid=1996491 ignore advice]}} from other users to not continue conversations which are outdated or no longer valid. Your comments were reverted for this reason, and because they added no constructive input to the page. Less than a week later, yet again you {{plain link|1=[http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Epic_Rosalina&diff=prev&oldid=1998101 replied to old comments]}} after other users had told you not to. Coupled with the fact that you have accumulated a large amount of other Reminders and Warnings before this one, the Warning you are appealing will stand.}} | |||
*[[User talk:Fawful's Minion/Archive 2#Warning]] | |||
====Fawful's Minion==== | |||
*What did I do to deserve this warning, all I did was just talk to a few inactive users and here comes BabyLuigiOnFire. She just gives me a warning for no good reason. It isn't mentioned anywhere in neither [[Mariowiki:Courtesy|The Courtesy Policy]] nor the [[Mariowiki:Warning Policy|The Warning Policy]] I checked both of them thrice and there is no mention saying you cannot message the inactive, but it '''does''' say that you cannot remove any comments even if the don't contribute as said on [[Mariowiki:Courtesy|Section 10 of the Courtesy Policy]] the only comments you can delete are flames, vandalism, and mine were none of the above. And she just gives me a warning for that. Seriously a warning was way too out of line. I actually have seen quite a few users do this and they haven't got any warnings for it so why should I get a warning for this. Wrong I didn't know there was a rule against that, BLOF was just being harsh Mario jc didn't give me a warning for sticking my nose into admins' business so. Also I was banned for sharing the same IP as vandals not for that said reason. I seriously didn't know there was a rule against that I am still new here. You can't revert comments bottom line also only you and your twin told me to stop no one else please name another person who told me to stop, I gave up after Toa 95 reverted on that page. I did say I gave up after the reversion didn't I also I wasn't sending friend requests to "random" inactive users, I sent them to either the most famous or ones with the coolest names. Also if it was informally you would've said please stop leaving friend requests not stop, I personally found that rude. Also what if you see the inactive user online but they don't do any edits. | |||
====Baby Luigi==== | |||
*I didn't give you a warning for no good reason. It's pure common sense to just not leave comments to users who have been inactive for literally years, as they literally cannot get back at you in a time-frame appropriate for a response. Doing so is a waste of editing user space, and it therefore falls under nonconstructive edits, which is, in fact, the default parameter when you give ''anyone'' a reminder in the first place. You've been told [http://www.mariowiki.com/User_talk:Fawful%27s_Minion/archive_1#Friend_requests informally] [http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Talk:Poop&diff=prev&oldid=1996482 multiple times (this one you reverted a user edit without any explanation, which by the way, Toa95, a sysop, approved of the user's revert of your edits)] [http://www.mariowiki.com/MarioWiki_talk:Courtesy in fact], to specifically '''not''' do this, this is the sole reason you received a Warning instead of a reminder, by the way. And sure, maybe the Courtesy and Warning policy doesn't talk about literally everything bad, but we've banned users for general incompetence before, that includes you, Fawful's Minion. One last note, I will bring up [[MarioWiki:Don't shoot your foot off|this particular]] policy page which serves an important purpose and perhaps why I felt you were deserving of a warning in the first place. Also, seeing other users do this is NOT an excuse for repeating bad behavior. Other users should ''not'' be replying or talking to older discussions. However, considering that you're a regular user who has done this ''multiple'' times in fact, after being told to do so, you ignored our advice and continued doing it. Ignoring advice actually falls precisely under the [[MarioWiki:Warning policy|Warning policy]] you cited, where you repeated an infraction after you're told to stop. So in fact, you did technically break an official guideline, so the warning should therefore stay. Saying "I didn't know" isn't an excuse to forgo common sense by the way. And if your comments are deemed nonconstructive, then yes we can revert them. Again, Toa95, a sysop, approved of that user reverting your comments. Forum talk is reverted, and so should necroing old discussions IMO. | |||
---- | |||
==={{user|LuigiBro}}=== | |||
{{AppealOutcome|warning|overturned|Asides from the fact that reverting an edit once does not count as edit warring, the user was experiencing an issue with the new version of the image. They should have simply been informed to clear their browser cache to view the image correctly: there was no warrant for a last warning.}} | |||
*[[User talk:LuigiBro#Last Warning]] | |||
====LuigiBro==== | |||
*Edit warring is undoing an edit that provided a reason multiple times. Not only did the edit I reverted not provide a reason, but I only reverted it once, and I did provide a reason. | |||
====Wildgoosespeeder==== | |||
I looked at this user's history before issuing and he had a history of edit warring. He uploaded a low-res version of [[:File:MPAdvanceUKboxart.jpg]] (first version) and I uploaded something better (second version). He reverted it because it wouldn't load on his userpage properly. I put back the higher quality version and suggested to him to clear his browser cache. After the reversions, I did notice something fishy with the thumbnail on his userpage. Instead of reverting the image, I used action=purge in the URL ([http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=File:MPAdvanceUKboxart.jpg&action=purge image], [http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Gallery:Mario_Party_Advance&action=purge gallery], and [http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=User:LuigiBro&action=purge user page]). On my end, that might have done the trick. |
Latest revision as of 23:32, August 24, 2021
BabyLuigiOnFirereminder overturned BabyLuigiOnFire
The Zombie Bros.
Mario7last warning amended Mario7
Pinkie Pie
The Chain Chompwarning stands The Chain Chomp
KP
Baby Luigiwarning overturned Baby Luigi
ParaLemmy1234
Mariowarning overturned Mario
ParaLemmy1234
Pinkie Piereminder stands Pinkie Pie
TrickyMario7654
Viper26reminder overturned Viper26KP posted a reminder about removing a talk page post that is about removing a section I deleted after seeing the post. KP re did the talk page post about removing a section on the user page and gave a reminder. Epic Rosalina thinks the reminder is too weak and should be given if I did this multiple times. He thinks I should go here and report the case. KPRemoving other users comments falls in the level two offenses in the Warning Policy, as does undermining admin authority, which he did by undoing Turboo's edit. I gave him a reminder for this and I think it is issued fairly. Also, Epic Rosalina is not all-knowing, and you should really give a reason yourself when appealing. CommentsYeah that's right. The reminder was issued fairly, but I followed Epic Rosalina's decision. - Viper26 (talk) BossBasswarning overturned BossBass
Epic Rosalina
TrickyMario7654last warning stands TrickyMario7654
Time Turner
Pwwnd123warning stands Pwwnd123
Time Turner
Marioreminder overturned Mario
Epic Rosalina
Baby Luigiwarning overturned Baby Luigi
Mario7
Pwwnd123reminder overturned Pwwnd123
Stonehill
Randombob-omb4761reminder overturned Randombob-omb4761
Joseph
Stonehillreminder overturned Stonehill
Viper26
Bazooka Mariowarning overturned Bazooka Mario
Joey2871
Tailikku1warning overturned http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATailikku1&diff=1894701&oldid=1891154 Tailikku1
Goolgenerade[NO COMMENT] Roy Koopa (talk)warning overturned Roy Koopa
MarioMario456
Fawful's Minion (talk)warning stands Fawful's Minion
Baby Luigi
LuigiBro (talk)warning overturned LuigiBro
WildgoosespeederI looked at this user's history before issuing and he had a history of edit warring. He uploaded a low-res version of File:MPAdvanceUKboxart.jpg (first version) and I uploaded something better (second version). He reverted it because it wouldn't load on his userpage properly. I put back the higher quality version and suggested to him to clear his browser cache. After the reversions, I did notice something fishy with the thumbnail on his userpage. Instead of reverting the image, I used action=purge in the URL (image, gallery, and user page). On my end, that might have done the trick. |