For the record, the post mentioned in the PM was the following, in response to a notification about the new "Contact Staff" tab in the Guide for Newbies:

Hmmmm - where's the "I'm old, crotchety and want to complain about those kids today" team?

Other recent incidences of the "argumentative" behavior mentioned can be seen:
Kalinin's Metacritique essay: http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1105307/metacritique-one#post-2242296
Criticism Policy conversation, in which he is defending the use of "meh": http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-677479/criticism-policy#post-2242288

I'm personally inclined to believe that this is just one user who believes firmly in his views, but if anyone else has issues with the guy's behavior, I can support disciplinary action given that they apparently have a history. Thoughts?

So… Eh?

Edit: Maybe I'm wrong. I know these sites have been around for a while, if for no other reason than the links have been unchanged for so long. Could the originals have been deleted and replaced? I distinctly remember looking at them a few days ago when he first posted in the SCP Fronts discussion page.

Edit Again: Just got the following from Bland:

When they turned it over to me, the cleared it out. Since I had cloned the site, it was just a matter of cloning it back. So, yea - the dates are changed.

…So yeah, I was right. They've been there for a while, and they were originally ours, just out of out reach due to The Administrator's absence.

I don't see the point really. As far as I can tell, the only front wiki anybody bothered making was http://corpsesoap-wiki.wikidot.com/ (by Gerald) and nobody did anything with it.

087 is exceptionally highly rated. I can't imagine the author changing it or any grammar changes being necessary. Locking it (and perhaps the other ones?) is just a very basic precaution.

It was a one-time incident and the voodoo was untouched anyway (by Bland or by me). Locking all such pages in response seems excessive to me.

Furthermore, the original image (with the voodoo) was not changed; only the face (second picture). While the face is part of that voodoo…. Meh? I'm not really sure I see the issue here. It was just a user doing something proactive to head off a problem before it happened.

Since he didn't actually edit the article itself, I honestly don't think that Bland should get even a warning for this. This isn't a mass edit or a gigantic change of any sort. It's just… helpful? At the very least, it's not hurtful at all.

As for a solution to all this, I do have a suggestion. Why not lock all pages using this sort of voodoo (I don't care what you call it, it's voodoo) so only mods and above can edit them? Seems like the logical thing to do.

The only thing that changed with the revert was that my edit from the static Photobucket link to the locally hosted link (of the second image, not the off-site main image) was reverted back to the Photobucket link. Should we just delete the uploaded 087 image from the article's file list?

He was around during and vocal about the dealie where sophos edited a bunch of images without permission and got into trouble for it, so he has no excuse at all, even were it not a page where the image was hosted on what is obviously a personal site and the effect is discussed in the thread.

The sandboxed article I deleted because that was what I thought we were supposed to do if someone attempts a change or rewrite of a -d. If that's problematic I won't do it next time. I generally hold the sandbox wiki to the same standard as the main wiki in that regard, that is, if a user posts something they're actually not allowed to do on the site, it gets deleted.

I mean, what ELSE is he supposed to do if he has an idea and wants to run it by the community? Carrier pigeon?

He posted a rewrite of a decomissioned article in the sandbox then announced it on the wiki. I deleted it and sent him a PM telling him that -ds were archived and not to be edited without admin permission. Here's the exchange:

Mod message (SCP wiki)

Users are not allowed to edit or add to -d articles without administrative approval. Those pages are archived, and may only be altered by direct assignment from bright or another admin. Stop now.

his reply:

That was why I wrote it in the sandbox.

…

Don't get snappy. The link has been removed from the SCP wiki forums, and the sandbox page will be deleted when I get around to it. Don't write, edit, or mess with decommissioned pages.

His reply to that:

I wasn't getting snappy. I was stating why I did something.

I am curious to know what's wrong with it. Other then the number and the "It's a guy in a concrete block" there's not really anything related to the original.

So yeh. Kid thinks he can do no wrong. His posts in the forum lately back up that analysis.