Hehe amusing edits to userpages, So which one of you was this? Options Rating

[Viridae]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=203240642
Same edit made to My userpage as well as Alison's, Lar's, NewYorkBrad's, Sir Fozzie's, Danny's, Giano's and LessHeard vanU's. I laughed at it.

[Peter Damian]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=203240642
Same edit made to My userpage as well as Alison's, Lar's, NewYorkBrad's, Sir Fozzie's, Danny's, Giano's and LessHeard vanU's. I laughed at it.

Looks like the Wikidefender? (Who is not a WR member, apparently).

[dogbiscuit]

And the joke is that the "vandal" is not perma-banned, but given a clip round the ear. No - "You are not here to build an encyclopedia." Imagine a post on Slimvirgin's page...

It was funny.

[Peter Damian]

And the joke is that the "vandal" is not perma-banned, but given a clip round the ear. No - "You are not here to build an encyclopedia." Imagine a post on Slimvirgin's page...

It was funny.

In fact it is the Wikidefender because one of the links is to his (or her) blog. WD's posts are easily confused, in the current climate, with diehard Wikicultists.

Care must be taken when engaging these egregious editors in conversation. If you should see one of these editors conversing with one or more banned trolls, please notify the [http://lists.wikia.com/mailman/listinfo/wpcyberstalking appropriate] private [http://lists.wikia.com/mailman/listinfo/wpinvestigations-l mailing list] or [http://wikidefender.blogspot.com/ wikidefending] [http://intelligentdesigns.net/blog/?p=86 blog] so that we can discuss their apathetic and trollish natures.

User now blocked

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...d_Mark_is_right

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Fri 4th April 2008, 8:55am

[dogbiscuit]

User now blocked

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...d_Mark_is_right

I look forward to his unblock request.

[Peter Damian]

User now blocked

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...d_Mark_is_right

I look forward to his unblock request.

Yes.

Did you read the other blog he linked?

http://intelligentdesigns.net/blog/?p=86 blog

That, disturbingly, seems to be serious, though it's hard to tell these days.

And what is the reference of 'The Reverend Mark was right'? Didn't understand that.

[dogbiscuit]

Yes.

Did you read the other blog he linked?

http://intelligentdesigns.net/blog/?p=86 blog

That, disturbingly, seems to be serious, though it's hard to tell these days.

That is Erik's (he of WMF employee fame) blog. So it is very serious. Be disturbed.

[guy]

I look forward to his unblock request.

No doubt Viridae can handle it, or one of the other admins involved.

[Peter Damian]

That is Erik's (he of WMF employee fame) blog. So it is very serious. Be disturbed.

I suspect not:

As community leader, Jimmy has developed and emphasized the values that we cherish: the assumption of good faith, the importance of neutrality in open collaboration, and the belief in a shared purpose. When he talks about bringing education to those who cannot afford it, he’s not just trying to impress. Anyone who spends 5 minutes with him will understand that this is his personal life goal.

It is obviously another spoof. To read it as seriously intended, would make you physically ill.

[wikiwhistle]

As community leader, Jimmy has developed and emphasized the values that we cherish: the assumption of good faith, the importance of neutrality in open collaboration, and the belief in a shared purpose. When he talks about bringing education to those who cannot afford it, he’s not just trying to impress. Anyone who spends 5 minutes with him will understand that this is his personal life goal.

It is obviously another spoof. To read it as seriously intended, would make you physically ill.

Sounds like something out of Tony Robbins or something lol

[dogbiscuit]

That is Erik's (he of WMF employee fame) blog. So it is very serious. Be disturbed.

I suspect not:

As community leader, Jimmy has developed and emphasized the values that we cherish: the assumption of good faith, the importance of neutrality in open collaboration, and the belief in a shared purpose. When he talks about bringing education to those who cannot afford it, he’s not just trying to impress. Anyone who spends 5 minutes with him will understand that this is his personal life goal.

It is obviously another spoof. To read it as seriously intended, would make you physically ill.

I scanned through the rest of the blog (barf!). It's been going quite a while.

[thekohser]

And what is the reference of 'The Reverend Mark was right'? Didn't understand that.

Reverend Mark "Raul654" Pellegrini, was my thinking.

And, not so fast on WikiDefender not being a Wikipedia Review user! You don't know that!

Greg

[Peter Damian]

And what is the reference of 'The Reverend Mark was right'? Didn't understand that.

Reverend Mark "Raul654" Pellegrini, was my thinking.

And, not so fast on WikiDefender not being a Wikipedia Review user! You don't know that!

Greg

But we don't know he is, either (standard philosophers' reply).

[thekohser]

And what is the reference of 'The Reverend Mark was right'? Didn't understand that.

Reverend Mark "Raul654" Pellegrini, was my thinking.

And, not so fast on WikiDefender not being a Wikipedia Review user! You don't know that!

Greg

But we don't know he is, either (standard philosophers' reply).

Err... you don't know he is.

That's all I'm saying on the matter.



Greg

[Peter Damian]

And what is the reference of 'The Reverend Mark was right'? Didn't understand that.

Reverend Mark "Raul654" Pellegrini, was my thinking.

And, not so fast on WikiDefender not being a Wikipedia Review user! You don't know that!

Greg

But we don't know he is, either (standard philosophers' reply).

Err... you don't know he is.

That's all I'm saying on the matter.



Greg

Well you said that before and I reply by the caviar rule: never throw a piece of juicy caviar on the table (or whatever you like) without the possibility of people consuming it.

And how do you know who he or she is?

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Fri 4th April 2008, 4:37pm

[Peter Damian]

More from Wiki defender (just noticed):

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...ul_discourse....

hopefully the page is fairly self-explanatory, but I thought I'd just make a note here if there are administrators interested in having a listen to some points and perspectives from editors who have been shown the door for various reasons from this project - then they can so at 'NotTheWikipediaWeekly' - thoughts and feedback most welcome..... Privatemusings (talk) 02:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

This would be kindof like... allowing banned users to post, via ogg, no? NonvocalScream (talk) 03:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't think they are banned on Commons. I for one think this is a good idea. EconomicsGuy (talk) 05:24, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
I think it might be interesting to hear the view that is usually rushed and cut off mid-sentence (so to speak) on wikipedia. And since the content will be reviewed (I assume) before posting, I don't see the issue. MBisanz talk 05:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, you guys think it is a great idea? I think it is a great idea too...Who wouldn't think it is a great idea to give lying trolls and stalkers a pulpit from which they can berate us with their belligerent ballyhoo? Give me a break people! This is a no brainer. Cui bono? Who benefits from PM recording and posting his sickening perversions here? This podcast (or more aptly, this BADCAST) is arousing troll titillation--nothing more. If you do not believe that, then I have to prudently question your probity. This section should be renamed "PrivateMusing's attempt at arousing troll titillation and barbaric brouhahas...."—because that is what it is. Wilky DiFendare (talk) 06:46, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

And a very silly edit here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waitaki_Boys&...?diff=203236315

Request reason: "I am a fearless and valiant vandal reverter and this accusation of vandalism is odious. Please point me to a diff where I have vandalised The Wikipedia. I am here to defend the wiki against trolls, stalkers, harassers, pranksters, buffoons and nincompoops. Do you disagree with my objectives? I am a fine upstanding Wikipedian. I don't understand why you are obstructing me from this goal. Please inform JzG of this block, for he is the moral compass of this Wiki and he will see this block for what it is: unjust, unrighteous and distasteful. I have a lot of work to do on behalf of some Great Wikipedians, please allow me to perform it. Wilky DiFendare (talk) 18:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC)"

I am requesting the assistance of JzG per your request. Rudget (review) 18:09, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm certainly puzzled. Your edits are appropriate vandalism reversion, but your confusingly insulting edit-summaries and the confusingly disruptive post to the administrators' noticeboard are very strange, and your reference to Daniel Brandt makes it clear that you aren't new to Wikipedia. What was your previous username? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wilky_DiFendare"

[Moulton]

It's really sad when people take themselves so seriously they can't even recognize, appreciate, or chuckle at a parody of themselves.

[thekohser]

I'm certainly puzzled. Your edits are appropriate vandalism reversion, but your confusingly insulting edit-summaries and the confusingly disruptive post to the administrators' noticeboard are very strange, and your reference to Daniel Brandt makes it clear that you aren't new to Wikipedia. What was your previous username? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wilky_DiFendare"

This makes me chuckle.

Some of my sockpuppets have gotten similar inquiries. "You're doing some good things for Wikipedia, but you're too snarky not to be an experienced user. Who were you before?"

And, this comes from "FisherQueen", someone we are only allowed to know is a professional English teacher and that she's a member of the Society for Creative Anachronism:



So, as per usual on Wikipedia, it's "We need to know who you really are, but bugger off asking us who we are. We're too embarrassing for real life."

Greg

[dogbiscuit]

And, this comes from "FisherQueen", someone we are only allowed to know is a professional English teacher and that she's a member of the Society for Creative Anachronism:

Hey, you are not keeping up, she (what is the Wikipedian for this?) self-identifies as having beautiful breasts and seems to hint that she has other useful bits in her edit mammaries.

I just hope she isn't bottom right...

[Kato]

And, this comes from "FisherQueen", someone we are only allowed to know is a professional English teacher and that she's a member of the Society for Creative Anachronism:

Hey, you are not keeping up, she (what is the Wikipedian for this?) self-identifies as having beautiful breasts and seems to hint that she has other useful bits in her edit mammaries.

I just hope she isn't bottom right...

This being Wikipedia, she's probably top left.