Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
_ Gary Weiss and his cavalcade of socks _ Gary Weiss, international man of mystery
Posted by: WordBomb
At some point I really hope to meet Cla68, in order to better appreciate the fellow who so consistently makes my day.
Here's a great example...
Gary Weiss, as MajorStoval, attempted to sidle up to, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eurasian_Land_Bridge&diff=next&oldid=327372161, Cla.
QUOTE(MajorStovall (aka Gary Weiss))
The important thing is that there is an article on this fascinating subject, and I want to thank and commend you for doing the hard work involved.
Cla (still unaware it's Weiss) invites MajorStoval to join him at WikiProject Military history.Weiss, salivating, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cla68&diff=prev&oldid=329114041:
QUOTE(MajorStoval (aka Gary Weiss))
Great idea! I'm a WWII buff. How did you know I have several shelves of WWII books?
(for the record, if Weiss really owns a single book on WWII, I'll gladly eat it.)At that point, Cla adds MajorStovall to the Military History mailing list.
On January 5th, MajorStovall is revealed to be Gary Weiss.
On January 6th, Cla delivers (in what I imagine was a very Bob Newhart-esque tone), http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MajorStovall&diff=336158238&oldid=336081927:
QUOTE(Cla68)
I guess I'll go take your name off the mailing list.
I wish I could be smooth like that.
Posted by: The Joy
QUOTE
This blocked user (block log | active blocks | autoblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs | abuse log) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.
Request reason: "I have no idea what this is all about, who "mantanmoreland" is, or why you are blocking me."
Decline reason: "Interesting, as "mantanmoreland" isn't mentioned in your block message or in the relevant sockpuppet investigation that led to your block. TNXMan 21:39, 5 January 2010 (UTC)"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MajorStovall#Blocked.3F
Request reason: "I have no idea what this is all about, who "mantanmoreland" is, or why you are blocking me."
Decline reason: "Interesting, as "mantanmoreland" isn't mentioned in your block message or in the relevant sockpuppet investigation that led to your block. TNXMan 21:39, 5 January 2010 (UTC)"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MajorStovall#Blocked.3F
That should go on the Fail Blog!
Posted by: Somey
QUOTE(The Joy @ Thu 7th January 2010, 11:45pm) 
That should go on the Fail Blog!
Not necessarily - it looks like he made that entry just after Alison put the "Sockpuppet of Mantanmoreland" template on his user page, so he might easily have seen that before making the unblock request.
I could see how MajorStovall (T-C-L-K-R-D) might not be Weiss - I don't believe any of us here pegged that account as Weiss before it was blocked (did we?). It doesn't quite show the same patterns and habits, and seems to have mostly stayed away from stock market-related subjects. He went straight into doing Recent Changes patrol, which I believe is something a Weiss account doesn't normally do... Alison says she's "100% certain" though, so I assume she has some technical evidence that's practically irrefutable.
Somebody around here said recently that you don't want to swing the justice pendulum too far the other way, or else you can be legitimately accused of being just as bad as the original bad guys.
Also, his user page has always started out with the words http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:MajorStovall&oldid=326636739, so you've got to give him some credit on that basis alone, don't you?
Posted by: Cla68
QUOTE(Somey @ Fri 8th January 2010, 6:27am)
QUOTE(The Joy @ Thu 7th January 2010, 11:45pm)
That should go on the Fail Blog!
Not necessarily - it looks like he made that entry just after Alison put the "Sockpuppet of Mantanmoreland" template on his user page, so he might easily have seen that before making the unblock request.
I could see how MajorStovall (T-C-L-K-R-D) might not be Weiss - I don't believe any of us here pegged that account as Weiss before it was blocked (did we?). It doesn't quite show the same patterns and habits, and seems to have mostly stayed away from stock market-related subjects. He went straight into doing Recent Changes patrol, which I believe is something a Weiss account doesn't normally do... Alison says she's "100% certain" though, so I assume she has some technical evidence that's practically irrefutable.
Somebody around here said recently that you don't want to swing the justice pendulum too far the other way, or else you can be legitimately accused of being just as bad as the original bad guys.
Also, his user page has always started out with the words http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:MajorStovall&oldid=326636739, so you've got to give him some credit on that basis alone, don't you?
Actually, I thought it was a little strange that he showed up on the Eurasian Land Bridge article so soon after I posted it, because his contributions log didn't show much effort, if any, in the topic areas that that article belonged to, namely railroads, Russia, China, or Central Asia. Weiss noticed the Robertson lawsuit article three hours after I posted it, which shows that he was probably frequently checking my contributions log. I didn't suspect that it was Weiss, however. Perhaps I should have, because Weiss does seem to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maccabiah_bridge_collapse&action=historysubmit&diff=309981058&oldid=309666126.
Posted by: Alison
QUOTE(Somey @ Thu 7th January 2010, 10:27pm)
He went straight into doing Recent Changes patrol, which I believe is something a Weiss account doesn't normally do... Alison says she's "100% certain" though, so I assume she has some technical evidence that's practically irrefutable.
There is!
When you see it, well ... QUOTE(Somey @ Thu 7th January 2010, 10:27pm)
Somebody around here said recently that you don't want to swing the justice pendulum too far the other way, or else you can be legitimately accused of being just as bad as the original bad guys.
Actually, both http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=27947&st=0&p=213927&#entry213927 made that point
Posted by: Somey
QUOTE(Alison @ Fri 8th January 2010, 1:30am)
Actually, both http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=27947&st=0&p=213927&#entry213927 made that point
Ah, that was it, thanks. I knew the phrase "swing the other way" came from somewhere other than my vast collection of Michael Lucas films...
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(Somey @ Fri 8th January 2010, 6:27am)
I could see how MajorStovall (T-C-L-K-R-D) might not be Weiss - I don't believe any of us here pegged that account as Weiss before it was blocked (did we?). It doesn't quite show the same patterns and habits, and seems to have mostly stayed away from stock market-related subjects. He went straight into doing Recent Changes patrol, which I believe is something a Weiss account doesn't normally do... Alison says she's "100% certain" though, so I assume she has some technical evidence that's practically irrefutable.
fwiw, Gary had recently started sporting a Major Woodie with his Johnny alias after being bestowed with "roll back" super powers or some such nonsense, and was going on a Major Powertrip with it. He probably realised in December thought as the WR spotlight on the Johnny Alias that it wasn't going to RFA, lol. Stoval or any other number of fresh socks would be needed to for the push up RFA hill in 2010. So sad.
But yes, there is some slight evidence of over-reactive zealousness (Furio block) the other way. Although David Gerard is staying out of it the over-reaction shooting on sight this time.
QUOTE(Somey @ Fri 8th January 2010, 7:35am)
QUOTE(Alison @ Fri 8th January 2010, 1:30am)
Actually, both http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=27947&st=0&p=213927&#entry213927 made that point
Ah, that was it, thanks. I knew the phrase "swing the other way" came from somewhere other than my vast collection of Michael Lucas films...
If you do decide to swing the other way, hopefully it won't be with Shankers shanking a camera probe somey taintside while you're in full flagrante. Then publish it on Kiddiepedia. Unfortunately we don't have any shankers photos of alison swinging the other way. Not only does Woody Allen agree that it gives you twice the chance of scoring at home on a Saturday night, but even Albert Pujols swings the other way when in a slump.
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Fri 8th January 2010, 5:42am)
At some point I really hope to meet Cla68, in order to better appreciate the fellow who so consistently makes my day.
It took me a review of just a few of his edits in my early WP career to begin sporting a Madden-for-Favre kind of manlove for Chuck. Although not enough to make me swing for the opposite field to increase my average. There is a podcast from Dan (who sounds differently than I'd imagined - very New Yawk) with Cla. Chuck speaks softly but carries a big truthstick ;-)
Posted by: CharlotteWebb
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 8th January 2010, 4:24pm)
…Albert Pujols…
No pun intended, right?
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Fri 8th January 2010, 5:42am)
Gary Weiss, as MajorStoval, attempted to sidle up to, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eurasian_Land_Bridge&diff=next&oldid=327372161, Cla.
QUOTE(MajorStovall (aka Gary Weiss))
The important thing is that there is an article on this fascinating subject, and I want to thank and commend you for doing the hard work involved.
Cla (still unaware it's Weiss) invites MajorStoval to join him at WikiProject Military history.Weiss, salivating, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cla68&diff=prev&oldid=329114041:
QUOTE(MajorStoval (aka Gary Weiss))
Great idea! I'm a WWII buff. How did you know I have several shelves of WWII books?
(for the record, if Weiss really owns a single book on WWII, I'll gladly eat it.)Lest we forget that Gary spent more than a year cultivating steadfastly under MM that he was Catholic (ok, a qualified half - which might be half true in his family tree, maybe his mum was irish-cath or something, but not for himself) and had gone to Fordham. All so he could go all out Mossad on the Palestine-Israel-Luther-Nazi etc with supposed neutrality.
In real life he also impersonated a journalist for almost 20 years.
There's also the short-lived EmilyWelles nom de plume, lol.
QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Fri 8th January 2010, 4:30pm)
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 8th January 2010, 4:24pm)
…Albert Pujols…
No pun intended, right?
completely intended. Makes me giggle every time a sports announcer applauds Albert's backside swing. Not proud of what makes me giggle, lol. I think it's those who don't use the proper Espanol pronunciation of Sir Albert's name who have a harder time understanding. Don't get me started on old American car racer Dick Trickle.
Posted by: Cedric
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 8th January 2010, 10:41am)
QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Fri 8th January 2010, 4:30pm)
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 8th January 2010, 4:24pm)
…Albert Pujols…
No pun intended, right?
completely intended. Makes me giggle every time a sports announcer applauds Albert's backside swing. Not proud of what makes me giggle, lol. I think it's those who don't use the proper Espanol pronunciation of Sir Albert's name who have a harder time understanding. Don't get me started on old American car racer Dick Trickle.
"Dude. He said 'Poo-hole'. Huh-huh! Huh-huh! Huh-huh! Huh-huh! Huh-huh!
Huh-huh! Huh-huh! Huh-huh! Huh-huh! Huh-huh! Huh-huh! Huh-huh! Huh-huh!"
Posted by: Piperdown
I'm the one on the right there. I've been found out.
Posted by: Cla68
The article is now http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Weiss&curid=6746272&diff=336574816&oldid=336095396
Posted by: WordBomb
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Fri 8th January 2010, 4:09pm)
The article is now http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Weiss&curid=6746272&diff=336574816&oldid=336095396
Posted by: EricBarbour
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Sun 10th January 2010, 4:33pm)
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Fri 8th January 2010, 4:09pm)
The article is now http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Weiss&curid=6746272&diff=336574816&oldid=336095396
(Weiss to self): "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Weiss&diff=prev&oldid=337012604"And whose IP addresses http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Weiss&diff=next&oldid=337012604?? Hmmm??
Posted by: Cla68
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Mon 11th January 2010, 3:37am)
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Sun 10th January 2010, 4:33pm)
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Fri 8th January 2010, 4:09pm)
The article is now http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Weiss&curid=6746272&diff=336574816&oldid=336095396
(Weiss to self): "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Weiss&diff=prev&oldid=337012604"And whose IP addresses http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Weiss&diff=next&oldid=337012604?? Hmmm??
Well, Christofurio http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Weiss&curid=6746272&diff=337263287&oldid=337100179 again. I guess he doesn't agree with the consensus on the article's talk page.
Posted by: Milton Roe
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Sun 10th January 2010, 8:37pm)
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Sun 10th January 2010, 4:33pm)
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Fri 8th January 2010, 4:09pm)
The article is now http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Weiss&curid=6746272&diff=336574816&oldid=336095396
(Weiss to self): "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Weiss&diff=prev&oldid=337012604"And whose IP addresses http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Weiss&diff=next&oldid=337012604?? Hmmm??
Redondo Beach?
Posted by: Piperdown
Chris must be pretty desperate...conde nasty desperate...after Gary's IP tries to remove majorly sourced material, so as to just leave his bookjacket promo in-tact, Chris "I coulda been a journalist" Faille helps out too....warms the heart to still see the fellas rolling out the barrels of ink.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Weiss&diff=prev&oldid=339540768
Posted by: Wikicrusher2
I'm absolutely certain that at one time or another, Weiss has used these IP addresses to edit Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.228.69
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.228.48
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.228.130
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.227.29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.230.7
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.235.154
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.236.87
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.236.108
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.237.108
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.238.155
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.239.172
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.241.160 is suspicious, but I am not sure that it's Weiss.
Posted by: WordBomb
QUOTE(Wikicrusher2 @ Mon 25th January 2010, 10:26pm)
I'm absolutely certain that at one time or another, Weiss has used these IP addresses to edit Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.228.69
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.228.48
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.228.130
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.227.29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.230.7
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.235.154
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.236.87
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.236.108
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.237.108
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.238.155
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.239.172
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4.231.241.160 is suspicious, but I am not sure that it's Weiss.
Posted by: Lar
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Tue 26th January 2010, 12:32am)
I wish the ArbCom would enforce the probationary status of this article and not permit unestablished editors to edit them.
Semiprotection doesn't seem to be one of the provisions of the probation.
Posted by: Milton Roe
QUOTE(Lar @ Mon 25th January 2010, 10:59pm)
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Tue 26th January 2010, 12:32am)
I wish the ArbCom would enforce the probationary status of this article and not permit unestablished editors to edit them.
Semiprotection doesn't seem to be one of the provisions of the probation.
God no. Protecting an article against random vandals and COI pushers? That would be unwikipedian.
Has anybody been to the WP:PADLOCK page recently. I'll give you 50 cents if you can figure out how to make a compaint there in less than 15 minutes. Then, if you manage to figure it out, some asshole says: "Hasn't happened in the last few hours. Denied."
Wow, that's a fun game.
