• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Wiki Vandalism Reports

I think I need to point out something important and let this be a reminder to be careful when editing profiles, especially when handling content revision threads.


This edit was based on this content revision thread: https://vsbattles.com/threads/genshin-impact-cooking-in-speed-and-attack-potency.172310/

Scroll down to the speed rating, and you can see the speed being changed to Massively Hypersonic, since that rating was accepted for a period. Until Bambu disagreed with the Massively Hypersonic+ rating, and it got removed: https://vsbattles.com/threads/gensh...and-attack-potency.172310/page-3#post-6787295

@Aernasilver's edit: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Raiden_Shogun_(Genshin_Impact)?diff=prev&oldid=8759839

That section of the CRT (or anywhere in the CRT at all) didn't address or debunk Raiden's attack speed of CtG lightning itself and therefore is still a valid rating for her attack speed:


It was on her profile before the CRT got applied. When her speed was changed to Hypersonic, that Massively Hypersonic+ attack speed rating should've been reinstated.

Anyway, I'm sure Aernasilver forgot to reimplement Raiden's massively hypersonic+ attack speed by mistake. But this should be a reminder to be cautious and mindful when editing profiles and applying CRTs, and even upon fixing the mistakes of others.
i have fixed and applied stuff from previous accepted crts, some will have to be done trough crts such as nahida one
 
My first report here!

Reporting user @VIZION99 for intentional vandalism for the purposes of winning a Vs Thread:
While discussing this match up, the user performed certain edits while citing this thread as justification for the changes. If you read the thread, these abilities were rejected. At first I thought it was maybe a genuine mistake, but the thread in question had already been applied by @Aolphl almost a year ago with the actual accepted changes. After having these abilities applied once more, they then tried to use them to argue The Lich would win on the Vs Thread.

Additionally, this isn't the first time the user does this type of vandalism. And exactly for the same abilities, curiously enough
 
He’s been warned thrice for vandalizing, and they definitely acknowledged it because they deleted the warnings. On that basis, I’ve given them an editing ban for a month.

@VIZION99 please do not vandalize our pages; if you continue to do so, I’ll be forced to apply a longer ban.

Edit: oh you’ve already been banned, ban extended to 1 year.
 
Last edited:
Given that they received previous warnings, and a previous 3 months block, and continued to vandalise almost immediately after it ended, I extended their block time to 1 year this time. 🙏
Well according to this, he already had a 3 month block before and then received a 1 year one (though seems they appealed that as he came back barely a few months after)
 
@LephyrTheRevanchist @Catzlaflame

VIZION99 says that he was banned due to a misunderstanding. 🙏

The abilities were explicitly rejected.

Edit: Also, again, he should've known because you yourself reverted an edit he made adding the same abilities beforehand, for which he got banned. He added these abilities conveniently in the middle of the match up and discussion too. I don't buy it.
 
Yeah, I agree with Lephyr. Perhaps he can be excused if it weren't for the deletion of warnings and correspondent vandalising actions in the past, but the fact he made the exact same violation does speak about his intentions otherwise.
 
This guy is clearly our for troll
 
This guy is clearly our for troll
I know we permanently block people like this, but I wonder if he could become a productive member of the community. I blocked him for a month and left him a welcome message/warning message, incase he reforms, if he doesn't reply, I'll extend it to a perma. let me know if this is too kind.
 
Last edited:
It seems sufficient given that the vandalism was comparatively light.

However, the vandal couldn't reply to your message due to your ban settings, so I adjusted them accordingly. 🙏
 
Also, VIZION99 wonders if his ban can be reduced to 6 months instead.

 
Also, VIZION99 wonders if his ban can be reduced to 6 months instead.

I'm fine with a 6 months ban, considering he was excused and given another chance in the last ban. However, this time he shouldn't be given an opportunity to appeal, unlike last time. And if he comes back after that 6 months ban and commits the exact same violation, I'd rather go for a permanent rather than implement a year again.
 

been a few days since this edit, but user added non-canon material to the profile for the weakness section.
 

been a few days since this edit, but user added non-canon material to the profile for the weakness section.
Twilight reverted it, I left them a message.
A user named Unfilteredhater001 did a series of vandalisms on the RoR verse.

Fortunately another user has already reverted the changes, but I assume that what Unfilteredhater001 did should be reported here.
Left them a warning.
 

Here's the one I noticed.
Fixed.
 
This page should be deleted as its obviously a troll
 
Also, VIZION99 wonders if his ban can be reduced to 6 months instead.

I'm fine with a 6 months ban, considering he was excused and given another chance in the last ban. However, this time he shouldn't be given an opportunity to appeal, unlike last time. And if he comes back after that 6 months ban and commits the exact same violation, I'd rather go for a permanent rather than implement a year again.
What do other staff members think about this? 🙏
 
henry stickman page (why cant we get real 1-A ngl)
 
Back
Top