GTA Wiki:Requests for Promotion/Jan 2014 Administrator Election/Dodo8

Case 1
A new user, John123 has made somewhere between 20-30 edits. They have all been minor edits but good - correcting spelling and grammar in articles and occasionally fixing the format of something. In the article Love Fist, he changes which instruments the band members play without leaving an edit summary. John123 is reverted by a patroller named CowboyPatroller, who uses rollback to undo the edit. John123 makes the same edit again, leaving the edit summary "maybe you should play the game, if you did you'd know I'm right". CowboyPatroller reverts him with rollback again. John123 makes the same edit for a third time, this time with the edit summary "STOP UNDOING MY EDIT YOU STUPID PRICK". CowboyPatroller rollbacks his edit again, and then tells you. For the sake of this question, you don't know which members of Love Fist play what instrument. What would you do?

''A: At first, I would warn John123. Even if he's right about his edits, he insulted another user of the Wiki. I'll ask other staff members about the instruments and the band members, or I could search by myself. If he continues editing the Love Fist page, I'll block him for 1 day, because he might not be aware that his edits are wrong. Then I'll talk to him again, and if the problem persists then I'll have to consider another block. If he's wrong about his edits, then I'll show him the proof.

Case 2
A brand new editor, Newbie200, makes an article called When Do i Get Trevor? The 'article' is a question about how long he has to play GTAV before Trevor becomes playable. Newbie200's written English is so bad that it's almost incomprehensible - he uses capital letters and punctuation almost at random and he frequently uses netspeak ('u' instead of 'you', '&' instead of 'and'). A regular user with no special rights and no prior history of bad behavior, GTAFAN316, nominates the article for deletion with the comment "lrn2wiki". CowboyPatroller reverts GTAFAN316 with the edit summary "Don't be mean dude" but doesn't otherwise talk to Newbie200 or GTAFAN316. Who do you think was out of line? As an administrator, what do you say and to whom?

''A: As a newbie, I should gave him Newbie200 some advices on how to write a blog. I'd warn GTAFAN316 and I would tell CowboyPatroller to ask an Admin when dealing with such situations.

Case 3
An editor has been uploading images and refusing to follow the image policy. He has been warned by a bureaucrat and blocked for refusing to follow the rules three months ago. He has continued to upload images - he now names them correctly but he doesn't bother with a license. When confronted on that he says "I don't bother with that only women care about such things". The bureaucrat who warned and blocked the user 3 months ago has said nothing about this. What do you do about this?

''A: I'd talk to the Bureaucrat who issued the block and I'll tell to him about the editor's uploads. I'd warn the user again, because he is not respecting the upload policy and the civility policy. Me and the Bureaucrat would consider blocking him again.

Case 4
A user named TheWikiKid says on his userpage that he is 10 years old. Bureaucrat01 blocks TheWikiKid for being underage and in violation of the Wikia-wide rule that says you must be 13 to edit. TheWikiKid posts on Bureaucrat02's Community Central talk page that he was only joking and that he's really 16, and so Bureaucrat02 unblocks him. Bureaucrat01 immediately reblocks him with the comment "he might be lying and he was causing trouble anyway". Bureaucrat02 re-unblocks with the comment "no he wasn't". The two bureaucrats start wheel-warring (undoing each other's admin actions) and swearing at each other on their talk pages about the incident.

"Stay out of it" is an acceptable answer but it is not the only acceptable answer.

''A: "Users must be at least 13 years old or over to have an account and use Wikia." I'll check TheWikiKid's edits in hope of finding something that proves that he's under 13. If I find something, I would talk to both the bureaucrats and show them the proof. I'd also tell them to calm down and check if the user has been blocked on other Wikis for being underage. If I don't find anything, the I'd stay out of it.

Case 5
GTA92 is a long term editor. His contributions are sometimes good, but he has a history of being argumentative - especially with staff. He's been blocked twice, once for a day once for a week, but both blocks are over a year old. He adds some The Sky Is Blue type trivia to an article, which you revert with rollback. He reverts you with the edit summary "You can't delete it just because you don't like it, 'sysop.'"

Case 5b

In addition to what was described in Case 5, GTA92 then follows you to two other articles and reverts your edits with the edit summary "wrong" for both of them. How do you handle this?

''A: I'd explain him that "the sky is blue" type trivia is wrong and I would block him for also being uncivil.

Case 6
A long term user on GTA Wiki named GTAmaniac decides to switch his affiliation to Grand Theft Wiki. He does this by announcing this on his user page. He also begins sending messages to other active users on GTA Wiki encouraging them to join him in switching affiliation to the other wiki. CowboyPatroller starts reverting the messages encouraging others to switch wikis. In response, users from the other wiki come over to this one and vandalize CowboyPatroller's user page and talk page. Grand Theft Wiki's owner Gboyers says that although he doesn't personally approve of his users vandalizing this wiki, it's outside his jurisdiction and so he won't even tell them to stop.

''A: I'd tell Gboyers that it is inside his jurisdiction because the vandals also contribute on his Wiki. I'd tell him to take action about it and consider blocking these users on his Wiki. On the GTA Wiki I'd block the vandals because they don't respect the policy (Vandalism and Spam).