Difference between revisions of "User talk:194.80.32.8"
From LGPedia
(To ban or not to ban?) |
(supporting the ban of a user for senseless changing of info in what seems like a targeted manner) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
I personally wouldn't go so far as to say his/her first edit was "vandalism", but the second certainly was. I'm willing to leave it at a warning for the time being. If another admin feels differently and wants to ban this user, I won't take issue with it, though. --[[User:Brucker|Brucker]] 12:55, 2 January 2007 (CST) | I personally wouldn't go so far as to say his/her first edit was "vandalism", but the second certainly was. I'm willing to leave it at a warning for the time being. If another admin feels differently and wants to ban this user, I won't take issue with it, though. --[[User:Brucker|Brucker]] 12:55, 2 January 2007 (CST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Well, I just noticed a change to Lordgreystokes page that implied some false information. I reverted it back. This user seems to be bent on choosing to write insulting comments or entries that are untrue. The last change that I reverted stated that Greystoke pretended to be an HSAO participant and that HSAO is an official part of lg15. As the person behind HSAO, I know for a fact that this information is simply untrue. (Greystoke was asked to speak for HSAO and HSAO is not a part of lg15, just my spin-off.) It is such a shame that some people (this user in particular) want(s) to diminish the work of all the people who put effort into making this LGPedia a worthy endevour. Just because it is possible for anyone to edit and make changes, people (this user in particular?) really should not include speculation as fact or personal issues as fact. It seems pretty targeted. I am not sure if it this last entry was vandalism, but it did change confirmed facts into statements with the implication of trying to discrediting LordGreystoke. I really want to be more involved in editing and revising this LGPedia, but I seem to spend my time reverting thoughtless incidents of seemingly personal vendettas. I suggest banning this user. [[User:Ogog|Ogog]] 07:08, 4 January 2007 (CST) | ||
Revision as of 13:08, 4 January 2007
- Welcome to LGPedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia, or to experiment in the sandbox. However, unconstructive edits or page blanking is considered vandalism, and if you continue in this manner you may be temporarily blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. 71.245.65.248 09:08, 2 January 2007 (CST)
I personally wouldn't go so far as to say his/her first edit was "vandalism", but the second certainly was. I'm willing to leave it at a warning for the time being. If another admin feels differently and wants to ban this user, I won't take issue with it, though. --Brucker 12:55, 2 January 2007 (CST)
- Well, I just noticed a change to Lordgreystokes page that implied some false information. I reverted it back. This user seems to be bent on choosing to write insulting comments or entries that are untrue. The last change that I reverted stated that Greystoke pretended to be an HSAO participant and that HSAO is an official part of lg15. As the person behind HSAO, I know for a fact that this information is simply untrue. (Greystoke was asked to speak for HSAO and HSAO is not a part of lg15, just my spin-off.) It is such a shame that some people (this user in particular) want(s) to diminish the work of all the people who put effort into making this LGPedia a worthy endevour. Just because it is possible for anyone to edit and make changes, people (this user in particular?) really should not include speculation as fact or personal issues as fact. It seems pretty targeted. I am not sure if it this last entry was vandalism, but it did change confirmed facts into statements with the implication of trying to discrediting LordGreystoke. I really want to be more involved in editing and revising this LGPedia, but I seem to spend my time reverting thoughtless incidents of seemingly personal vendettas. I suggest banning this user. Ogog 07:08, 4 January 2007 (CST)
