What is Cirt's Deal?, Did a Google Search for Cirt and Wikipedia and was shocked Options

[rockyBarton]

I have had a few encounters with an admin named Cirt who struck me as really territorial about certain articles. Curious, I did a Google search "Cirt wikipedia" and came up with several threads on this board. After having read them and I am shocked at the history of this editor and left wondering how someone like this can be an adminstrator.

Cirt edits more than 18 hours a day and 7 days a week to boot. How can anyone do that?

Given the number of hours Cirt edits and their anti-cult agenda, has anyone ever been suspicious that they are paid, or that the account is used by more than one person?

Doesn't Wikipedia have rules against this kind of thing?

This post has been edited by rockyBarton:

[Mathsci]

Now this...

[pietkuip]

Now this...

And now Durova says that my response was an aggressive statement. Yes, I am well aware that the safe thing to do is to repent and to grovel, and to promise that I will never do it again. Whatever "it" is.

This post has been edited by pietkuip:

[Wiki Witch of the West]

Now this...

And now Durova says that my response was an aggressive statement. Yes, I am well aware that the safe thing to do is to repent and to grovel, and to promise that I will never do it again. Whatever "it" is.

Hey guys. Honestly Piet, what ain't aggressive about a call to desysop someone over a single mistake that he corrected ten minutes after you explained your objection--even though you refused to provide a source? Were the heavens going to fall because the wiki published a birth date as 1975 instead of 1974 for a little while?

Let's cut to the chase. A couple of days ago Cirt posted to the Commons AN board because someone had been trying to edit war speedy deletion tags onto some of his uploads. I think you ignored the fact that they already had OTRS tickets and reached a snap decision. Even though Cirt has never provoked you, you haven't let up on him since. You nominated an entire category of his video uploads for deletion without having watched them. Then when he created an article to demonstrate they were within project scope you got all over his back at en:wiki. When he tries to talk things over with you, you accuse him of bad faith.

It's already been explained to you that fellow has written more featured content about Scientology across multiple WMF projects than anybody else. Yet you refuse to give him a chance and I can't see why. There's a fifty pound chip on your shoulder; it must be causing back pain.

WMF has a lot of problems. Cirt ain't one of them. There's plenty of stuff at the other end of the bell curve at Commons that deserves a critical eye. Some of the images I've been category sorting are so badly out of focus they probably deserve deletion. Let's just put this behind us and get back to work.

This post has been edited by Wiki Witch of the West:

[Somey]

Hey guys. Honestly Piet, what ain't aggressive about a call to desysop someone over a single mistake that he corrected ten minutes after you explained your objection--even though you refused to provide a source? Were the heavens going to fall because the wiki published a birth date as 1975 instead of 1974 for a little while?

Why does that reasoning only apply to him, and not Cirt? If anybody overreacted here, it was Cirt. It looks like he's trying to intimidate people with block warnings and such over trivial issues, presumably as a ball-thrusting move, to keep people from daring to question him. Unless he was just in a bad mood, for some reason?

Let's cut to the chase. A couple of days ago Cirt posted to the Commons AN board because someone had been trying to edit war speedy deletion tags onto some of his uploads. I think you ignored the fact that they already had OTRS tickets and reached a snap decision.

I'm not sure I would call it a "snap decision" - the dates don't lie, do they? In effect, Cirt is saying that a 16-year-old boy was an "official" in Scientology, when in fact he was probably just a under-aged security guard on one of their happy-boats. You and I know that Scientology does a lot of weird shit, including promote people into positions of responsibility based on things like e-meter scores and how much they look like certain celebrities, but most people don't know that. Nor is there any real evidence for that claim in this particular case, IMO.

Now, I happen to believe that anything that bashes, crushes, smushes, slices and/or dices Scientology is a good thing, and clearly Cirt does too, and that's also a good thing. But you have to maintain some subtlety, some appearance of equitability. Scientology is already on the ropes on WP, isn't it? Is it really necessary to behave like this when the good guys are winning?

[Wiki Witch of the West]

Now, I happen to believe that anything that bashes, crushes, smushes, slices and/or dices Scientology is a good thing, and clearly Cirt does too, and that's also a good thing. But you have to maintain some subtlety, some appearance of equitability. Scientology is already on the ropes on WP, isn't it? Is it really necessary to behave like this when the good guys are winning?

Saxton left Scientology in his early twenties. The mainstream press of New Zealand and Australia didn't see his age as an obstacle and neither did the Australian Senate. NOR aside, there's no second guessing how much authority an irresponsible organization would grant to someone that young. Consider how many Wikipedia administrators are in their teens. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

[EricBarbour]

NOR aside, there's no second guessing how much authority an irresponsible organization would grant to someone that young. Consider how many Wikipedia administrators are in their teens. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

And how many WP admins are insufferable assholes.

Why do you keep boosting Cirt's on-wiki profile, crazy woman?