Difference between revisions of "CWCki talk:Banned Users"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m |
(→Um...) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
== Um... == | == Um... == | ||
I don't know about this. Shouldn't we put down the reasons for banning specifically rather than their whole background? For example, 16BitAlex I don't think needs that much elaboration. I think "Banned at his own request" would be adequate. Also, having just looked over records, CrescentSkunk was actually banned for inserting false information into pages. --[[User:Edward|Edward]] 15:50, 16 July 2010 (UTC) | I don't know about this. Shouldn't we put down the reasons for banning specifically rather than their whole background? For example, 16BitAlex I don't think needs that much elaboration. I think "Banned at his own request" would be adequate. Also, having just looked over records, CrescentSkunk was actually banned for inserting false information into pages. --[[User:Edward|Edward]] 15:50, 16 July 2010 (UTC) | ||
*Agreed.--[[User:Champthom|Champthom]] 15:53, 16 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 10:53, 16 July 2010
Page Created
So yeah, Champ asked and I made it. Additions/corrections/etc are more than welcome- I don't recognise many of the names on the list, so feel free to add in more details. I'd recommend we keep it slightly-brief in order to prevent glory seekers/namefags.
Um...
I don't know about this. Shouldn't we put down the reasons for banning specifically rather than their whole background? For example, 16BitAlex I don't think needs that much elaboration. I think "Banned at his own request" would be adequate. Also, having just looked over records, CrescentSkunk was actually banned for inserting false information into pages. --Edward 15:50, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- Agreed.--Champthom 15:53, 16 July 2010 (UTC)