Guild Wars Wiki talk:Admin noticeboard/Archive 6

Shard and Uchiha Lena

While I don't see any problems with contesting ArenaNet or their support staff, the way that Shard and Lena have gone about is stupidly annoying and inappropriate. Most threads they end up in turn into flame fests filled with NPA violations and failed trolling attempts. I would say your best bet Gaile is to request an Arbcomm, obviously blocks and warnings aren't working so that seems like the only option left. --Shadowphoenix 15:59, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

While Shard has been very guilty of this behavior in the past...the current thread this whole admin notice refers to he said 2 very small things that were not his usual banter and rage, were not his usual NPA borderline issues. In all honesty, he should only be penalized for the actual disruptions he has caused...not to throw it all on Lena, but Lena is the contributor of that thread's content. However, I see no problem with Gaile requesting that Shard, Lena and even Adrin not be allowed to post on her page.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 17:34, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I thought we weren't lumping people? [[1]] (sorry, i really know we arent supposed to discuss here.) --adrin 23:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

This is the discussion page, so discussion is allowed. It is, however up to Gaile whether she wishes to open an arb com on either, both, all three, or none. Each individual will be judged by the bureaucrats on their individual actions, not as a group. -- Wyn 23:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

• smacks forehead* i need to read urls more. i /agree with the individual actions thing, we all deal with anet in different ways. --adrin 23:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Isn't this whole "proof of a.net being biased" violation of the policy that tells not to disturb the wiki to make a point? ôO Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 00:00, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I think Gaile just wants them off her page(s). — Jon Lupen 00:01, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

You'd be wrong. She wants me off the wiki. ~Shard 00:18, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Them refering to the three of you as a collective. — Jon Lupen 00:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

If only everyone could effectively communicate and more of the devs had an open mind. None of this would have been an issue. Unfortunately some people just can't understand what blunt people have to say. Sad thing is people who care about the state of the game end up causing problems with each other. Responsibility belongs to both sides, but I blame the ones with greater power more than those without it. Y'all probably should just move on from discussions with Gaile. Better to offer your views to support directly who hopefully would be willing to understand what you are saying. If you really want to troll though there are plenty of ways around any punish given to you, just saying someone should take the high road and it might as well be you.~>Sins WDB 04:30, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Sins, I would wholeheartedly disagree, people understand what "blunt" people are saying, they just have heard it so often, they are tired of it, and the continued repetition has reached the point of harassment in some cases. Also, in several instances, these "blunt" people have gone beyond being "blunt" and become rude and in violation of NPA in the belief that it was the only way they were going to be heard. -- Wyn 04:38, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

History proves that belief. ~Shard 04:42, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I read ya Wyn. I just want people to take from what I wrote that things can go to far and if they start to get out of hand someone needs stop it before sh** hits the ceiling. People don't always agree and when they don't you can be stubborn for a while, but it has to end at somepoint. The way it ends... well thats determined by circumstance and hopefully disagreements end in a fair manner with some respect from both sides. Obviously not the case here, at least for now. I don't think this is over though, becuase of how wronged people have been.~>Sins WDB 06:38, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Its over...or so I've said a few times. There is no reason why Gaile should not request that the two of them should not be able to post on her page. At this point, if anything else needs to be said, it should be between them, Gaile and Support via Anet's website or emails or through some kind of legal litigation or counsel. As far as it goes on the wiki, there is nothing more that needs to be said, done and nothing will be changed at this point.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 17:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

The biggest problem I have with blunt people is the whole 'you agree with me or you're an idiot' style. Combined with the fact that they tend to avoid things like arguments and proof, and that they're still somehow able to get the masses to side with them (due to their language and opinions), it makes them rather inappropriate for this website. They really should reserve it for fan forums or review sites. 145.94.74.23 07:40, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

What does that have to do with me? ~Shard 08:25, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

@145.94.74.23-> Its called flaming. This wiki does permit flaming in some levels. Some forums dont permit such actions. Carry on.--ShadowFog 16:44, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I am referring to the whole 'Gaile doesn't like me so I got banned' stuff. I'd like to see proof, if possible. 145.94.74.23 07:01, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

You are just not looking hard enough. If possible, although quite unlikely, please understand it's not anyone's obligation to spoonfeed you with evidence, especially when it's already available and posted in some part of the wiki. If you cannot be bothered to do your homework, please don't say the knowledge and information doesn't exist simply because you didn't see it. Pika Fan 07:39, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

What Pika said, but with an added /facepalm. ~Shard 07:54, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

On topic... Shard's willingness to stop seems to be a farce. If he was going to stop posting by himself, he'd have done so already. He's still posting, so I'm going to have to assume he's just blowing smoke on that one. In regards to this comment, it honestly doesn't matter if he agrees to be subjected to the terms or not. It is up to the Arbcomm to come to a decision, and it's pretty final no matter how much the affected users disagree with it. There is also no predecent for a user to come up with terms of his own punishment. That seems silly for so many reasons I won't even list them here.
Either way, the ball is still in Gaile's park. Gaile, do you want to request the bureaucrats look into the case or will you settle for individual sysops banning the involved users like normal? If you still have questions, feel free to ask, but this has been on the noticeboard for a few days so I'm interested in seeing it resolved. -Auron 09:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I was offering to bypass arbcomm for a quick fix, not to define my own terms (I suspect those would be the limitations, if any, if the Bcrats decided to do something). My comments in those places have usually been questionable if not disruptive.

As for me simply not posting there, that's not who I am. I will continue to point out Anet's double standards, hypocrasy, and lies as long as there are people there not already aware. In simpler terms, I'm not doing it because I want to, I'm doing it because I can. This is me saying I'd like to be unable to. ~Shard 19:58, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

And for that reason alone, you might find yourself facing much stricter restrictions than you are imagining. I can pretty much guarantee that if it comes to an ArbCom, the Bureaucrats will decide to do something. Your overall attitude imo is not benefiting the wiki and it's community in any way, you are simply stirring up as much disruption as possible, simply because you can, but you seem to not care about that in the least. -- Wyn 21:50, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Then get her to start an arbcomm. ~Shard 04:18, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

All an ArbComm means is stricter regulations on the Shard account (depending on the outcome). If it were me and I found the results to be an inconvenience for what I wanted to say and where I wanted to post it that wouldn't stop me. Fortunately I don't have the situation Shard does, so I probably won't have that problme. I don't know how far Shard would go to keep pointing things out and posting what he wants (this would also depend on the outcome), but I'm just saying ArbComm means very little when it comes down to people saying what they want to say.~>Sins WDB 05:37, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

All the sysops know I don't sock or vandalize. If restrictions were placed on me, I would follow them. ~Shard 23:35, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Here are a few random thoughts: The way that specific members have posted is unacceptable, no matter who it was directed at. I don't protest certain threads or comments because of who I am or where I work so much as because I see breaches in the wiki standards and I note content that shouldn't be present. In the thread I first pointed out, and in several that have followed, there are numerous instances of what I feel are clearly NPA violations, and that's why I brought the matter to the admins.

If people choose to post on a certain name space or not, the core issue is whether they're violating the rules of conduct or the policies of the wiki. People who post should follow the rules; people who don't should be sanctioned. I think the best people to decide whether sanctions are warranted are the wiki SysOps and Bureaucrats; I believe they are in the best position to determine whether this is an arbitration situation, a clean-up situation, or a ban/warn/remove situation.

For wiki members: People who use my wiki page -- who use any wiki page -- should obey the rules of common courtesy and follow wiki standards. If they do that on my pages, I will probably respond. If they don't, I won't. I will exercise my right to archive content as I see fit. But consider: If I find myself having to spend more time in archiving inappropriate content than in interacting on the wiki, then clearly there's a problem. -- Gaile 00:33, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

@Gaile: One issue being that anything that is not praising either the game or ANet has been getting not only called trolling but those posts get trolled far worse by those that wish to, for lack of a better term, brown-nose. All that leads to is the wiki becoming extremely biased in favor of the game and so on. That is a bad thing since it only presents one side of a story and does not show the whole picture. Part of documenting the game entails even showing/pointing out the bad aspects of it. Players and Devs are part of the game as well, especially when it's about their conduct with the game.

"If I find myself having to spend more time in archiving inappropriate content than in interacting on the wiki, then clearly there's a problem." Yes there is a problem with that and instead of addressing the issues they are being swept under the rug, so to speak. Trying to hide the issues isn't resolving them nor is it going to make them go away and neither is trying to ban users who are bringing forth the issues. Those actions only serve to further user complaints about the members of the ANet staff and support. If the time spent trying to hide and deny all the issues was spent on actually solving them then there wouldn't be that many in the long run. As it stand now, they just keep piling up.

One reason why users use this Wiki to complain about the Anet Staff or support or game issues is in the hope that someone higher up the chain of command might see these issues and work to do something about them. Those users are holding on to what seems to be a forlorn hope that the game will improve which means the Anet staff and support improving as well. 68.52.189.88 01:22, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

"Part of documenting the game entails even showing/pointing out the bad aspects of it." Define "bad aspects." --Riddle 01:44, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Leeching, botting, exploits, bugs...the race for Cavalon... Vili 点 01:57, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Most of what Vili said and then some such as: All the useless skills, support, clunky interactions (can't shoot someone who is standing next to a wall, Attacking someone in melee who is on a bridge above you, ect...), horribly designed Hard Mode, support, lack of any real communication through the game (Such as useful login announcements and use of the NPC in GToB), devs playing favorites (It happens whether you admit it or not, Shard has a nice link for it on his page, and look at the leaks from players on upcoming skill changes), Anet staff throwing a tantrum (Like Gaile's and Andrew's posts on the forums when they where still CR) and there is much more that is wrong with the game that needs fixed. For them to be fixed though they must be brought more to light and not archived away to hide them as it prevents the game from growing. Look at the course of the game and how it keeps going downhill since all the issues are archived/deleted/ignored all this time by the select few who should be helping to bring the issues to light with the dev team. Anet controls how the game turns out so they go hand in hand with game issues as it is up to them to fix them and prevent them. Any Anet staff/support playing favorites or choosing to ignore the players is bad for the game. Also, listening to the players does not mean implimenting everything they want, it's about seeing what features they want and what is causing them issues in game and then seeing what can be done about said issues and then the CR informs the players of the response. "We are too busy working on GW: F or GW: N or GW2" has always been the biggest reasons along with the "Game engine can't handle it" and anyone can see those are simply used to keep from actually fixing any issues at all. Anet and GW has many issues that to be documented as it all affects the game and how the players can play it. 68.52.189.88 04:10, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

And just what does that wall of text have to do with whether or not Shard and Lena deserve to be brought before the Arb Comm, or face other administrative review of their actions on this wiki? This is NOT a let's bitch about Anet section, take that to your userspace.. oh.. you don't have one, you aren't registered.. ok, take it to Shard or Lena's userspace. It doesn't belong here. -- Wyn 04:17, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

"stuff" So if the wiki is documenting the game, and keep in mind that's its the game that we're supposed to be documenting here, why are we documenting the politics of the company that created the game? Sure, documenting bad or flawed traits of the game, such as the bridge attack bug or the fact that SoS is outclassed by basically all forms of shutdown is very objective, easily proven and shown without very much stretching of logic. Stuff like "The Devs banned me because they hate me"/"The Devs play favorites"/"The Devs lie" is all politics/drama/shitfest, and as such does not fall under the "need to be documented" category. To imply that Shard or Lena shouldn't be punished because they are "documenting" drama is, indeed, a terrible notion. --Riddle 05:22, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

@68.52.189.88: The anti-Anet voice is a lot stronger on this wiki than the pro-Anet voice. For every "Hey Anet, good job!" post there are at least 5 "Hey Anet, you suck!" posts. But that's besides the point, what matters isn't what they write, but how they write it. Gaile has a problem with that and so she called for arbcomm. It's up to the arbcomm to decide wheter they're 'guilty' or not. 145.94.74.23 06:22, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Well even after all that text... I ask, do you wish to have an ArbComm? If so please use the appropriate avenues to do so. I honestly would like to see them dealt with. --Shadowphoenix 17:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

None of the ArenaNet or User spaces are here to document the game. In Gaile's Case, people are going to her page to get help with support. ~Shard 07:56, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Change 'are here to' to 'are required to' and you would be correct. There is much game documentation in both places. --Max 2 15:27, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

The point of this discussion and possible arbcomm request is not about documenting the good and bad of Anet. It isn't about Anet being good or evil or somewhere in between. The issue is not about Shard and Lena venting about how they were treated or their situation...there is no reason they should not be able to talk about those issues, question choices and decisions made by Anet about them. The issue is the manner in which they chose to state their case. Now, please do not get the impression that I agree with Shard and Lena's bans...I do not...I feel that Anet does express bias and I have made that abundantly clear...however, the manner in which I made that known differs greatly from Shard and Lena. It is possible to express anger in a polite, tactful way. The big problem is Shard and Lena have not expressed themselves in the best possible way...no offense to either of you, I love you and have fought hard to defend and help you. But I can see both sides of the issue, and to be fair and unbiased I have to say that this arbcomm is about expressing your frustration in a less than polite way. That is what this is about.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 16:02, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Umm, why the long rant in response to a simple correction to Shard's mis-statement of facts? --Max 2 16:17, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Look beyond the most immediate situation at everything around you. — Jon Lupen 16:21, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

What a lovely pearl of wisdom. ~Shard 19:16, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Then again, take a moment to smell the flower under your nose. There are times to look at the broad view. There are also times to make sure you are not poised to step into a pot hole. Yasmin seemed to have the two activities confused... --Max 2 21:42, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

No mistatement of facts, its an attitude problem that is to be discussed here.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 21:55, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

User:Uchiha Lena

→ moved from Guild Wars Wiki:Admin noticeboard

LOOOOOOL this is too cute. "For a couple of days" ? We've only been playing our game for less than 24 hours. Seriously, Wyn... Why do you consitantly stalk mine and hers page? Jeanette and I are perfectly fine-- last time I checked-- this morning she definately didn't want me to "leave her alone". You've been out to get me ever since my temp run for BC when it backfired on you that I was a serious candidate and how you tried to make me out to be a joke (in which Yasmin beautifully countered you). As I've mentioned in my email to you, you've been stalking my page and my gf's TRYING to find ANY excuse to get rid of me. -Lena™ talk 14:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't stalk you, or wafflez. I do follow the RC, and the fact that several people went out of their way to point out to me the discussion on her page, and someone else posted about it on the noticeboard, and your edit summaries which were pretty vile, I find your claims to be totally without merit. It's up to the Bureaucrats now.

I also did not treat your candidacy for bureaucrat as a joke, that would be everyone else on the wiki. As for you being a viable candidate, since you withdrew, we will never know. -- Wyn 14:44, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Wyn... You can lie to me, you can lie to yourself, but you can NOT lie about the truth. You're stalking me on this wiki. Everytime a convorsation happens (between SHar, Adrin, and myself) on this wiki that pertains to a bias ban that Arena.Net has commited you are the FIRST sysop to come jumping in. -Lena™ talk 15:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

It's called stalking RC and Wyn does it hard. Misery 15:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Misery... I so very, very much agree with you. She's been doing nothing but stalking me as of late. I mean... Come one! Look at my talk pages! Look how often she comes onto them! Look how much she came onto my BC talk page as well trying to hard to shut me down! That is considered indirect-harrassment (and borderline stalking), last time I checked. -Lena™ talk 15:11, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I think you need to check your facts Lena, I very rarely comment on your discussions with Shard and Adrin, unless they are on a staff talk page, and inappropriate or contain policy violations. I have said little if anything about anything any of you have posted in your user space about how badly you all think ArenaNet sucks. As for whatever little "game" you and wafflez like to play, you've been told repeatedly to keep it off the wiki, and yet you continue to bring it here. So as I said, it's up to the Bureaucrats now. -- Wyn 15:11, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

You're not understanding what he's saying. What he's saying is that Wyn is the first to jump into any conversation the second anything happens because she actually lives on this wiki. —ǥrɩɳsɧƴɖɩđđɭɘş 15:12, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Grin. You understand what I am trying to say. It's very annoying and seriously makes me feel uncomfortable because it makes me feel as if I have personal stalker because of how often/frequest Wyn tries to jump down my throat. I would really appreciate if Wyn would kind just leave me alone. -Lena™ talk 15:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

And there's a bird that flies by my window and maybe 50 others a few times every day. Maybe I should tell it to bugger off? —ǥrɩɳsɧƴɖɩđđɭɘş 15:24, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Heh... Words of wisdom right there. No matter how many times you tell the birds to eff off they will always be right back the next morning. -Lena™ talk 15:27, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

The bird isn't doing any harm to anyone. Neither is Wyn, except she stops by and cleans up stupidity too. —ǥrɩɳsɧƴɖɩđđɭɘş 15:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

While I agree Wyn does stop REAL drama from time to time, I, on the otherhand, find it completely rediculous she would go far as to try and rid me off of wiki because she wants to play marriage-councel for my gf and myself. -Lena™ talk 15:30, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I strongly doubt that she's trying to play counselor here, I think she (and the other sysops that chimed in yesterday) are just trying to get it off the wiki, where it doesn't belong. Freedom Bound 15:31, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

And it's off the wiki. -Lena™ talk 15:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Show me where. Provide a link, a before/after edit thing, etc. Also, learn to indent. —ǥrɩɳsɧƴɖɩđđɭɘş 15:34, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Then it's in MSN, because Wyn doesn't use anything. MSN keeps the chat logs. —ǥrɩɳsɧƴɖɩđđɭɘş 15:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Wyn can fly? oO --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 15:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

His trolling is becoming pretty effective. Lovely and disruptive. The Wafflez thing looked suspicious, I thought aspects of it were amusing. Until Wafflez admits it was all a big joke we can't really accept what Lena is saying at face value. Whether it was a joke or actually a fight is kind of irrelevant in my opinion, trollin iz trollin. Misery 15:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

this does not need to be brought to arbcrom. please drop all of this. please. --W a f f l e z 20:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

At this point, it's pretty clear that it's gonna take a decision by the ArbComm not to accept the case for it to be "dropped." You're much better off making an actual case in favor of that happening on the talk page for the ArbComm request than whining on every page of which you can think. *Defiant Elements* +talk 21:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

talking about it on 2 pages is "whinning" ? please, get over yourself.--The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Wafflez (talk).

Holy jesus

Everyone's banned...what happened? Why am I still here? Should I bring a sweater to hell? ~Shard 22:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Biased admins. Misery 22:34, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

They suspended Lena. Lemming lied and said if his gf came on and confessed he (Lena) was not lying that they (Lena and his gf) were only playing with eachother he would lift the suspension. Lemming did not honor his end of the bargain. In return, Lemming got Defiant to ban his gf as well for "not shutting up". :\ --Jonnieboi05 22:38, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Lol, alone the emails some of us sysops got from them justify both bans enough.. poke | talk 22:40, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

A biased admin would say that. Misery 22:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

are you REALLY dumb enough to think we don't know that's you, Lena? -FireFox 22:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

It really wouldn't have mattered, as after the actions of both of them today, the ban would have been reinstated by someone else. This is not a case of biased, power hungry administrators, it's a case of users who don't care that their actions affect the entire community. -- Wyn 22:43, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I went through some of it. I agree with the decisions made from just a few of the things I saw. I missed all the action :( ~Shard 22:59, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I demand moar drama. --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 23:00, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually yes, "JonnieBoi05" is Lena's account here on wiki (though he does not use it, *I* do from time ot time). It was his first account created. I am his brother and I am the one typing right now just as I was before (he stepped out with his girl about 10 minutes ago now to get chinese food XD). You cannot permanantly ban someone for using their brothers account, not to my knowledge. I am on my laptop right now so would you be so kind as to remove the permanant ban you I was just issued? I would very much apprectiate it since this is obviously a misunderstanding. I am not my brother, he can be brutally harsh, and well.... I don't know how to be harsh like *that* as seeing I am still only 15 years old. -.- Thank you, Arena.Net staff people. :) --jonnieboi --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:66.190.82.117 (talk).

Sorry that was me above. I signed my comment. --jonnieboi --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:66.190.82.117 (talk).

Anet doesn't ban people from wiki, sysops do, you can email one of them to try to sort it out, but based on the situation, you might just have to wait until the bans are over. ~Shard 23:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Two things to clarify real quickly. First, Lemming did not "get" me to ban Wafflez; I did that entirely at my own discretion and without any consultation with Lemming. Second, the original block message was facetious, which I hope most people understood implicitly. That said, Lena and Wafflez both need to learn that they can't simply use the wiki as their own personal playground and then bitch about it when they get blocked. Disruption is a very good reason for a block. *Defiant Elements* +talk 23:19, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Wafflez

→ moved from Guild Wars Wiki:Admin noticeboard

I think most of us received such an email. However in my opinion the block was justified and I don't see a reason to undo a one-day block in this case.. poke | talk 10:49, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Wafflez is a pretty obvious sock of Lena, based on the emails some of us received that matched (in style and wording) emails we've received from Lena. I wouldn't be surprised if the Wafflez account gets perma'd similar to the Jonnie boi account. -Auron 11:36, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I got emailed by both the jonnieboi account and the wafflez account asking for review, the former claiming to be Lena's brother and the latter claiming to be his GF. I have no way of proving who these people are, however I will say that all three have the same writing style and use of the English language. I blocked the jonnieboi IP for the same week length as Lena's and I see no need to review Wafflez's ban. Regardless of if it was a joke or not, the disruption caused by their behavior justifies a ban of a much longer period IMHO, so I think a day ban is pretty lenient. -- Salome 11:41, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Based on the extremely rude, threatening and downright vile email I received from Wafflez then I would support extending her ban anywhere from a week to permanent. I am happy to forward the email to anyone who would like a copy for reference. --Lemming 12:43, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Please could you forward the email to me. I am curious to see what she said. -- Salome 12:46, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

After receiving the email that Wafflez sent to Lemmings, I personally am very much in favour of perma-banning her/him. The email user feature should not be used to harass out users and certainly no one should ever be sending that stuff to anyone EVER! Therefore I would like to ask what the other sysops felt about this, as personally I think she needs banning or at least put up arbitration like lena is. -- Salome 01:55, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Wafflez is not Lena's account, though it is possible Lena uses it to post/email. (It's his GFs, and I've talked to her). Just thought I'd say that. I'll go away now. ~Shard 02:10, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Shard. Either way however I am still strongly in favour of perma banning it. -- Salome 02:29, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

BTW the jonnieboy account is Lena's. Both Lena and Wafflez tell me no such email of that description was sent. It doesn't make sense to me why they would send something as bad as described and then lie about it. I have no need to figure out what's really going on, but you should know this stuff so you can decide what needs to be done. ~Shard 02:48, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Shard, a lot of us read the email, Lemming got, it definitely exists. poke | talk 11:46, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

And I'm sure you all checked so that it isn't just some random person trying to cause more trouble, and it really is sent by Lena/Wafflez (whoever sent it)..? - anja 11:48, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Lena has now forwarded an "email" allegedly from Lemmings to Lena, in which basically Lemmings is a small white cat and an eye patch away from being a james bond villain. I know I'm trying to stay objective here, but really the "email" was clearly lena writing it and sending it and signing Lemmings to the bottom of it. What makes this so obvious is that both Lena and Wafflez have crappy sentence structure, whereas lemmings is quite clear and flowing, the email I got from Lena however had the same crappy sentence structure that Lena, Wafflez and johnnieboi all have (even though they are 3 different people apparently, according to the messages I've received). This is really getting tiresome to be honest. EDIT: and yes from what lena sent to me just then, it is Lena and the message forwarded to me from lemmings is from Wafflez. -- Salome 11:54, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Shard, in what way are you communicating with Lena and Wafflez? Can you be sure it's not just Lena? 99.151.139.100 11:57, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I've talked to Wafflez on vent. I know the differences between male and female voices. They're definitely two different people. ~Shard 20:52, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

But recently? Say, within the last few days? 99.151.139.100 21:42, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) "This e-mail was sent by Wafflez to Lemming64 by the "E-mail user" function at Guild Wars Wiki." It is all properly signed off as coming through inter-wiki mail. and the usernames match. If Wafflez is letting Lena use her account to circumvent his ban then that is just as bad and if he has hacked it than that is just as bad too as she is responsible for securing her own account. Not to mention I was not the only one to receive such emails. Auron and Wynthyst both received very similar ones. And even then not counting the email stuff, the behaviour on the wiki is enough to call for this action anyway in my book. --Lemming 12:49, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I find it strange that Wafflez updated some game link pages today, which is something Lena has done in the past. Not sure I've ever seen her do that. Misery 13:03, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

hello. I would just like to say that it was definately me who made the forward links. my bf guided me on how to do it. about for the email salome has mentioned by my boyfriend jon, lemming never sent anything to him. jon was telling salome how easy it was to fake an email and i read the email for myself and nowhere did my boyfriend accuse lemming of sending it to him. --W a f f l e z 14:41, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Do you deny sending emails to any of the sysops then with outrageously abusive content? --Lemming 15:37, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

This is the message I got:

"Allow me to elaborate:

Lena, you are a seriously demented fuck who I will do anything in my power to have both you and your girlfriend Wafflez removed permanantly from this wiki. I don't give a flying shit that I lied about the email that I claimed Wafflez sent me- any appeal you have will fall on def ears giving my vast background and the support I recieve on this wiki. So, having said that, please refrain from ever emailing me again you sick fuck.

Sincerely,

Lemming64

--

This e-mail was sent by Lemming64 to Uchiha Lena by the "E-mail user" function at Guild Wars Wiki.

Made my point? :)"

In hindsight I may have misunderstood his intent with the message, as he may have meant it as more of an example as what could have been done rather than what was actually sent, although to be honest it was pretty fucking abstract. -- Salome 18:04, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

At this point it doesn't matter as the one day block has expired. -- Wyn 18:15, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the fake email though, does it actually say it is from ncsoft.com and also list my actual email address as a wiki email does? --Lemming 20:00, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Nah your email address is just typed in manually. And in response to Wyn actually I think it does matter as I think wafflez should be banned for a much longer period of time for using the email feature to send hate mail to our users. -- Salome 20:41, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Help please

→ moved from Guild Wars Wiki:Admin noticeboard

Not that it's really my business, but that craigslist ad seems pretty illegal IMO. i'd talk to someone about that cuz thats really fucked up what he did. --adrin 04:07, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

PLease refrain from discussing on the noticeboard. Drogo Boffin 04:08, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

The following are screen shots from my facebook page...of the conversation that was going on and what max decided to do as well as my responses and such.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/3/12/876887/Image1-fbconvo1-1.jpg
http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/3/12/876887/Image1-fbconvo1-2.jpg
http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/3/12/876887/Image1-fbconvo1-3.jpg
http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/3/12/876887/Image1-fbconvo1-4.jpg

Just so you guys can fully understand how much he has gone out of his way to do this stuff. - Tesla 04:25, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Tesla just to clarify, you know this admin board is only wiki admins right and not anet staff type admins and thus as such we can't do anything about his off-wiki activity and nor can it influence our in-wiki actions? I hasten to say I think what's happening to you is awful but I also think you should be contacting actual support and making a complaint about the person. -- Salome 06:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh my apologies. I actually posted this up here cause some people were curious about what he is putting me through. I am not asking for it to influence actions. However, maybe use it as notes...to show a pattern of behavior..if that is possible. I am very aware there is only so much a person and as admins that they can do...like I said, I was post this hear for those who were curious. My apologies for any problems it might have caused. - Tesla 06:22, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

If it's harassment outside of GW and the Wiki, only certified law practitioners can help you. You may wish to consult one if it gets out of hand. 152.226.7.205 06:28, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for that very helpful information. It has been harassment in and out of wiki, guild wars, face book and all of that. Anyhow, thanks again for your help. ^_^ - Tesla 07:26, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Well you can block him on facebook, they would probably ban him off there too for some of that stuff. What is the username here? --Lemming 08:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Erm... User:Maximillian Greil. -Auron 09:51, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I guess I don't need to answer that since he decided to speak up. So there you go Lemi. - Tesla 13:22, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

No he didn't 99.144.229.95 13:46, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

That was Auron giving Lemmings the user name. -- Salome 09:36, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh your right. =.= Shows how tired I have been lately. My apologies, guys. - Tesla 20:58, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Request Undeletion of wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Guild:Fok_Forum_Junkies

We came to the conclusion today, that this page is deleted. Could you please restore the page?

Thanks in advance,

Jo0Lz / Miss Darky

It was archived as a historical guild due to lack of edits. I've restored it from the archives for you.--Pyron Sy 11:23, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

buy-spam bots

Is there anything we can do to prevent either those accounts or userpages being created? Evidently the captcha stuff isn't working on them. -- Brains12 \ talk 16:48, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Given their rate of appearanch, they may well by manual created, with copypaste text. That we can do little about, unless we want to prevent human registration. Backsword 16:57, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

We only have the adding captcha wonder if there is a way to get the distorted text version on here. Dominator Matrix 03:37, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Deleting user images of permanently banned users

We have few real users who have been permanently banned (as opposed to pure vandals who don't have an identity here). Some of those still have userpages and user images on the wiki, and I don't see the point of either. While those don't waste too many resources, I don't see a reason at all to have such waste, and it would be simple to delete at least their images. What do you people think? Erasculio 12:24, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Deleting their images would leave red links all over the place for anyone that's created a userbox template, used a custom sig, or participated in talk page discussions with screenshots. Why bother? --Freedom Bound 12:28, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

They can still use their images here while banned, making us a nice image hosting page for someone completely useless to the community. Erasculio 12:29, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

In the past I sometimes deleted the userpages of perma banned people.. poke | talk 13:29, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

And since images show you what pages link to them, it allows any "useless" images to be deleted. King Neoterikos 15:12, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't care what you guys decide to do, I'm indifferent, but just putting two cents in our piggy bank of a discussion. Banning someone doesn't mean we permanently erase every trace of them from the wiki, it simply means that that user is stripped of their editing privileges for an indefinite amount of time, theoretically forever. calor (talk) 00:08, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I can't think of a specific case right now, but you don't think it would be possible that that user would be unbanned in a distant future? As Calor says, we are just stripping their editing rights, really, and I think deleting their images and user page looks bad. :/ - anja 06:54, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm also in the "I don't care" group, but I share Freedom's concerns - if it's their signature image and it's all over the wiki, it really doesn't need to be deleted. If the banned user has a ton of huge ass pictures in his userspace, I really wouldn't object to those being deleted, but the small ones (or ones used on many pages) should be left. -Auron 06:57, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

If the userpages were deleted, the images used on them would become orphaned and be deleted through that process. It would leave the image (sigs etc.) that are used on various pages throughout the wiki intact. I personally don't see a need, as I don't think we are in jeopardy of running out of space any time soon however. -- Wyn 08:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't know if images work the same normal pages do, but doesn't the wiki software keep a copy of each image anyway? I thought deleting mostly just prohibited access to a page, since it can be undeleted at any time. Seems like a pointless waste of time, to me. If someone does something stupid and posts a link to a specific file on a place that will get it crapflooded and more views than the main page, I could see the need to delete it, but otherwise... --Jette 08:32, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Lock and delete the userpages imo, the images will be deleted later as part of the orphaned process, or tag them immediately, but as suggested, leave sig images so as not to red link the entire wiki. --Lemming 08:59, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Unless there is a very VERY good reason, such as totally inappropriate or illegal content, lock the pages and do not delete them. --Max 2 20:30, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Why not? Erasculio 21:53, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

More appropriate question is Why? Unless there is a reason, destroying their contributions, even to their own user pages, is a punishment. Being unable to edit the material is pretty harsh. Deleting it without cause would just be spiteful and harms the remaining members that might find something useful there, however unlikely that is... --Max 2 22:49, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

In other hand, they become completely useless to this community, while still being able to read everything the wiki offers (which is its main asset) and while still draining our resources by hosting their pages and their images. By being permanently banned, I think they have proved they don't deserve the courtesy of being allowed an userpage here. Erasculio 23:30, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary, tbh. The things they've created have been created, so deleting them doesn't free up space or give us more resources, but it does give the sysop more work to do. In my opinion, just leave it to the sysop; if he thinks it's necessary to delete or protect something, he can, and if others disagree they can voice those disagreements. Each case can just be treated individually. -- Brains12 \ talk 23:42, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Brains there. As for protection of pages, again, that comes to discretion of the sysop. If it gets trolls/vandals for example, why not protect it? --Antioch 02:10, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Nicholas the Traveler

Ok, I think it's time to change the protection of Nick's page. First, take off the sysop only, then, in my opinion, make it permanently auto-confirmed only. Almost every monday it's been hammered by IPs. I know that often IPs are the ones who finally put the right item on the page, but they could still put that on the talk if it's protected. --JonTheMon 20:20, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually it was very quiet the last weeks; I don't remember any vandalism last week. Today was just a bit weird because it took so long to find out the new location. poke | talk 20:29, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Also for the current protection, I don't see a need to stress the wiki with changing the protection now, when it will expire automatically in some hours. poke | talk 20:30, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Protecting the page seems to be a consensus on the talk page - see Talk:Nicholas the Traveler#Vandalism and Talk:Nicholas the Traveler#Constant vandalism & false information. While today wasn't as bad as last week, it's still bad in comparison to other articles - it's also a very high-traffic page, so keeping vandalism out of it is a high priority.

Protecting the article each Monday may cause some problems though - we already have wiki slowdown/breakdown whenever a page is protected, and I doubt the amount of people swarming to see and edit Nick will help that. An indefinite protection would be better. -- Brains12 \ talk 20:57, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Protected by Kakarot. -- Brains12 \ talk 21:34, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

User:Jette

Is endorsing the pirating of CS4 on her userpage. I don't know if there is a rule against that on this wiki so I will stop here.--96.225.141.88 09:21, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Its not against the rules at least here. Plus most torrents either have virus's, have traceable cracks, can't update, or all of the above. Telling Jette to remove the link won't work either so just ignore it. --Dominator Matrix 22:03, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

GWW:USER requires users to comply with GW's ToU and RoC, and both include to certain degree notes in regard of the distribution of pirated software, so yes, there is a rule against it.--Fighterdoken 22:14, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I thought Emily said we didn't have to follow the in-game rules (or that she would follow up on the issue, and in the meantime it should be 'business as usual'). The policy is probably outdated in regards to that. -- Brains12 \ talk 22:19, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I thought she didn't answer in the end? I got bored after waiting 9 months for the answer. But yeah, if she did, probably the mention to such line should go.--Fighterdoken 22:23, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The HELP:IMAGES page as well as Screenshot page have links to freeware 3rd party image editors. That covers the "official" stance of the wiki. Things posted on user pages are, imo, impossible for us to control in those areas. -- Wyn talk 22:27, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

User:Armond

→ moved from Guild Wars Wiki:Admin noticeboard

Threat to ban. Deliberate disruptive remarks. General disparagement. In other words VANDALISM! And the material was MOVED to the appropriate archive specifically reserved for TROLL DROPPINGS! --Max 2 06:49, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Max, informing you that users have been banned for removing comments from their talk page, is not a threat. Armond is not able to actually ban you as he's not a sysop, so seeing that comment as a threat doesn't make a lot of sense. As for General disparagement, that is not something that is considered vandalism. I would suggest you take a deep breath, and get a thicker skin if you are going to continue to bait the trolls. Moving the comments to your archive (though your "Sewer" is in pretty poor taste, and inviting more trolling imo) is fine. Generally archiving it as a singe entry rather than piecemeal is going to have less of a chance of attracting attention. I saw you remove 2100+ characters, and only saw you archive 600... thus my comment. -- Wyn talk 09:19, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

He'd restored previous pieces so I didn't replicate them. The entire sequence is there if you look.

As for the threat, I know the rule and I had deliberately avoided crossing its line, so there was no call for him to 'remind me' about the rule. That meant he was going to try to get one of the sysops to issue a ban. He might not have been able to implement that action himself, but his intent was clear and that intent was to get a ban issued. Hell, he might even have succeeded if I hadn't posted here first. (Yep, poor taste, but trolls taste worse.) --Max 2 09:36, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Actually, no, you wouldn't have been banned, since you had actually archived, and seriously Max... take a deep breath... we sysops aren't total idiots, regardless of what you may think. We don't just automatically ban because of a report on the noticeboard, we do check contributions and history. -- Wyn talk 09:39, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, I know you would not have issued the ban, but from the way Auron has been posting in the last few hours, and the fact that he has banned me before, I do have cause for concern. He and Warblade seem to be 'good buds'. (On the other hand, to be fair, Auron knows about the Sewer. He actually OK'd its creation beforehand.) --Max 2 09:58, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Auron does not use his sysop tools to further the intentions of his "good buds". None of us are going to frivolously ban anyone. As I said, the sewer is pretty meh imo, and is very likely to attract more trolling than it is suppose to solve, but it does comply with the archiving policy. A word of advice, if you'll listen to it, escalating these issues to the noticeboard, and persisting on a course of action that disregards others' opinions and input is going to cause you more grief than I think you need. It falls under the heading of "disruption" and can actually lead to bans. I would suggest you become a bit more flexible in some of your thinking, rather than maintaining a hard line, and try working with people who are discussing things, rather than constantly fighting them because their idea doesn't fit with yours. -- Wyn talk 10:17, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Wyn, get some sleep, you need it. You're not thinking as well as you usually do. I'd agree that he'd not do that when he's full function, but he seems to be in a mood at the moment. I should have hit the sack hours ago myself too so I'm crazier than usual... Night... --Max 2 10:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

WHY DOES EVERYONE THINK I DON'T SLEEP? I don't really care if you don't take my advice Max, I was just trying to be helpful. -- Wyn talk 05:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Sunjiang District

Contained material from guildwiki. Has been removed from current version, but still needs relevant revisions deleted. (See talk there) Backsword 16:12, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Block evasion?

If an IP admits that he is a banned user, does that IP get banned? -- FreedomBound 19:15, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Usually, as long as a report of such is done on the noticeboard. In any case, previous instances of the same have been due to the user persisting on the actions which caused him to earn the ban on the first place, so i guess it's up to admin discretion for this one in particular.--Fighterdoken 23:11, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Abuse of admin power.

lena they banned you from the wiki, you have to get over it --adrin 01:54, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

It's strange that this IP knows Lena's IP address and that I was in the guild a while back. This is odd, since the only person in that guild who knew me was Lena. [OBVIOUS SARCASM]Hmmmm...[/OBVIOUS SARCASM] ~Shard 02:35, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Wyn isn't abusing anything, she's doing her job. If the IP address is the same as Lena's then she is doing the right thing.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 04:57, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

even if it isnt him, he's making a bunch of smurf pages that dont belong on the wiki. --adrin 04:59, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Who are you to judge what is and is not allowed on this wiki, Adrin? If you want to influence policy then make the suggestions to the admins and have them review it. And yes, I would know what the beginning 2 numbers are for my friend hence it's all over the edit history for our guild page. How shall I put this... Ah! "*drools* Drrrrrrr... Which way did he go George, which way did he go?" --24.126.139.224 00:03, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

GWW:YAV plskthx. – Emmett 00:06, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Ups, wrong wiki – Emmett 00:08, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

"If you want to influence policy then make the suggestions to the admins and have them review it." That's not how it works btw.. you make the suggestions to the COMMUNITY and THEY review it. As for the guild page policy, there's little about it I don't understand, since I wrote the current version of it. As for using my administrative discretion while dealing with issues pertaining to a permanently banned user, I take it seriously and do not act capriciously. There were good reasons that Lena was banned from editing here, and nothing has proven them wrong. -- Wyn talk 00:15, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

So, Lena fails. Which means it's either a Friday, a Saturday or a Sunday. Next please (and I still think we should delete his userpage and his pictures). Erasculio 00:17, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

IIRC that's still being discussed somewhere. ~Shard 03:01, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Most recent archive, and it got archived as a "no". -- FreedomBound 03:41, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Wiki Notices

I figured this is a better place for this, seeing as how I don't think it's a bug. After dismissing the wiki notices, why are they reappearing on the next page I visit or after the next refresh? — Jon Lupen 21:10, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

They should not appear if you allow cookies. At least it is working fine for me. poke | talk 21:12, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I think I need to have a talk with Firefox then. They stay dismissed in IE. Thanks Poke. — Jon Lupen 21:28, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

GWW:NPA

I personally think that if everytime someone said "gtfo" or any similiar things would be considered personal attacks, GWW wouldn't have many users. We all have those moments. Titani Ertan 09:05, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Question.

Would this be the place to request a usermerge? User:Why is way more convenient than User:Why Are We Fighting. If it's not too much trouble for you guys, of course. — Why 00:50, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Pling is currently the one dealing with user merges, but I guess posting it here is fine as well. poke | talk 07:03, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

People always get directed here when they approach a sysop personally, thats why I decided to take this to the noticeboard instead. — Why 13:25, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's more a bureaucrat job with bureaucrat discretion. I'll create a page for it later, so we can have all those requests at one place (and add a mini-FAQ there) poke | talk 16:13, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

^ Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for user merge. -- pling 20:36, 12 October 2009 (UTC)