The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> DICK of Distinction awards - totals and master listings
EricBarbour
post Thu 2nd February 2012, 2:25am
Post #1


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Image

Note: I did not take totals for Tag-Team votes because they are extremely messy, and
the votes for Straight Shooter and Cojones are fairly consistent: Alison, Cla68, and Thatcher
have greatly dominated the vote totals, far ahead of anyone else.

This post has been edited by EricBarbour: Thu 2nd February 2012, 2:29am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Herschelkrustofsky
post Thu 2nd February 2012, 3:10am
Post #2


Member
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,199
Joined: Tue 18th Apr 2006, 12:05pm
From: Kalifornia
Member No.: 130

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



People should take care to differentiate between "total votes" and number of voters. These contests don't have the massive public appeal that the top chart suggests. You have to divide the vote total by the number of voting categories to get an accurate count of voter participation.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
melloden
post Thu 2nd February 2012, 4:57am
Post #3


.
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 450
Joined: Tue 30th Nov 2010, 4:43pm
Member No.: 34,482



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 2:25am) *

Image

Note: I did not take totals for Tag-Team votes because they are extremely messy, and
the votes for Straight Shooter and Cojones are fairly consistent: Alison, Cla68, and Thatcher
have greatly dominated the vote totals, far ahead of anyone else.

I'm surprised Van Haefton is more of a dick than SlimVirgin.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Herschelkrustofsky
post Thu 2nd February 2012, 5:54am
Post #4


Member
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,199
Joined: Tue 18th Apr 2006, 12:05pm
From: Kalifornia
Member No.: 130

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



SlimVirgin's heyday was in the early years of the Review, when the Academy had fewer members.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Fusion
post Thu 2nd February 2012, 1:38pm
Post #5


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 346
Joined: Tue 29th Nov 2011, 12:40pm
Member No.: 71,526



I think that this poll suffers from a serious problem. People naturally vote for people they had heard of and bother to do no research. There was a canvassing thread but it was cut short. I could have told you that Fae would win the Dick award before we started, with all the recent threads about him. I did indeed take the trouble to search through WR history. How much coverage has the third place candidate Sandstein had on WR? Very little. And Jmabel, third for straight shooter, has had even less. Have half a dozen threads about them next December and they might win the next awards!

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Thu 2nd February 2012, 2:48pm
Post #6


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



QUOTE(Fusion @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 8:38am) *

I think that this poll suffers from a serious problem. People naturally vote for people they had heard of and bother to do no research. There was a canvassing thread but it was cut short. I could have told you that Fae would win the Dick award before we started, with all the recent threads about him. I did indeed take the trouble to search through WR history. How much coverage has the third place candidate Sandstein had on WR? Very little. And Jmabel, third for straight shooter, has had even less. Have half a dozen threads about them next December and they might win the next awards!


Fae, as far as I know, was the only candidate to have been critiqued vigorously by the mainstream media. That had something to do with it, too.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
A Horse With No Name
post Thu 2nd February 2012, 6:34pm
Post #7


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,471
Joined: Mon 26th Jan 2009, 1:54pm
Member No.: 9,985



QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 9:48am) *

Fae, as far as I know, was the only candidate to have been critiqued vigorously by the mainstream media. That had something to do with it, too.


evilgrin.gif evilgrin.gif evilgrin.gif evilgrin.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Thu 2nd February 2012, 8:47pm
Post #8


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Fusion @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 5:38am) *

I think that this poll suffers from a serious problem. People naturally vote for people they had heard of and bother to do no research.

Thank you, for pointing out something essential. The DICK awards aren't really for the "worst" Wikipedian, they tend to focus on the most obnoxious one from the past year. People despise Ottava, yet he's generated mountains of good content for them. So why is he #2 in that list? Did he do "harm", or did he just make enemies? Is Wikipedia a "reference work", or a popularity contest?

Perhaps we need a new award, for the Wikipedian who harms the Wikipedia database the most? Quite frankly, most of the people in that list would not qualify, because they've been making good content for it.

(Gerard is a "special case". Show me some "good content" he's written. Go ahead.)

No one ever focuses on the really insane deletionists, patrollers and Facebookers in the admin corps. Some of THOSE bastards actually HAVE harmed Wikipedia. By banning good contributors, by deleting needed articles, and by being generally arrogant and selfish, thus harming Wikipedia's public reputation. Not to mention semi-worthless AN/I trolls like Baseball Bugs, or any number of subtle vandals who have never been caught.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Herschelkrustofsky
post Thu 2nd February 2012, 9:58pm
Post #9


Member
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,199
Joined: Tue 18th Apr 2006, 12:05pm
From: Kalifornia
Member No.: 130

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Hmmm... I think I disagree. I think that the most harmful editors are the POV pushers, because they have destroyed the credibility of the project by converting into a WP:SOAPbox for propaganda. They also drive away good contributors whom they regard as their opponents, either by simply annoying them to the breaking point, or conniving to get them banned. Wikipedia doesn't suffer from an article quantity problem, because that would solve itself over a period of time. It's a quality problem.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Fusion
post Thu 2nd February 2012, 10:50pm
Post #10


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 346
Joined: Tue 29th Nov 2011, 12:40pm
Member No.: 71,526



QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 2:48pm) *

Fae, as far as I know, was the only candidate to have been critiqued vigorously by the mainstream media.

Which mainstream media?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Thu 2nd February 2012, 11:52pm
Post #11


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 1:58pm) *
I think that the most harmful editors are the POV pushers, because they have destroyed the credibility of the project by converting into a WP:SOAPbox for propaganda. They also drive away good contributors whom they regard as their opponents, either by simply annoying them to the breaking point, or conniving to get them banned.

That is somewhat true. Yet the craziest POVers have also written good material--biased as it often is,
it could be cleaned up, provided that anyone in the Freak Show really cared. They don't, so it isn't.

I'm thinking of really disgusting slimy characters like Orangemike, Hersfold or MuZemike. People
who block good editors, ruin the thing's reputation, and go around killing good content (most of the
real bastard-admins are also deletionists). I frankly think Orangemike should be tied down and
forcibly medicated. Not administering an "encyclopedia".

No one ever talks about Alexf or Tnxman307, two of the worst blockers, with user-block lists that
go on forever. I know for a fact that they've both blocked hundreds, maybe thousands, of people
improperly, apparently just for the sheer hell of it.

(Alexf is a rabid deletionist. He tries to kill articles that he really should not kill. Evil? Sloppy?
And, Alex Feldstein is relatively easy to find in the real world. I don't see his name in the DICK award votes.)

Or Ryulong. He screwed a LOT of people, and I don't recall anyone setting things right after he was desysopped.
There are still WP admins who think he is a great, great guy.

This post has been edited by EricBarbour: Thu 2nd February 2012, 11:56pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
melloden
post Fri 3rd February 2012, 4:17am
Post #12


.
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 450
Joined: Tue 30th Nov 2010, 4:43pm
Member No.: 34,482



QUOTE(Fusion @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 10:50pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 2:48pm) *

Fae, as far as I know, was the only candidate to have been critiqued vigorously by the mainstream media.

Which mainstream media?

I'm really not sure.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Zoloft
post Fri 3rd February 2012, 7:27am
Post #13


May we all find solace in our dreams.
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,332
Joined: Fri 15th Jan 2010, 11:08pm
From: Erewhon
Member No.: 16,621



QUOTE(melloden @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 8:17pm) *

QUOTE(Fusion @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 10:50pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 2:48pm) *

Fae, as far as I know, was the only candidate to have been critiqued vigorously by the mainstream media.

Which mainstream media?

I'm really not sure.

O RLY?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cino
post Fri 3rd February 2012, 11:56am
Post #14


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue 24th Jan 2012, 11:43am
Member No.: 75,073



QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 9:48am) *

Fae, as far as I know, was the only candidate to have been critiqued vigorously by the mainstream media. That had something to do with it, too.


Has there been anything written by someone not here on Wikipedia Review? As evidence of anything, this all seems a bit incestuous, frankly.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Fusion
post Fri 3rd February 2012, 4:22pm
Post #15


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 346
Joined: Tue 29th Nov 2011, 12:40pm
Member No.: 71,526



QUOTE(Cino @ Fri 3rd February 2012, 11:56am) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 9:48am) *

Fae, as far as I know, was the only candidate to have been critiqued vigorously by the mainstream media. That had something to do with it, too.


Has there been anything written by someone not here on Wikipedia Review? As evidence of anything, this all seems a bit incestuous, frankly.

There seems to be an elsewhere thread for this. I shall reply there to avoid disrupting this thread.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
melloden
post Sat 4th February 2012, 2:00am
Post #16


.
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 450
Joined: Tue 30th Nov 2010, 4:43pm
Member No.: 34,482



QUOTE(Zoloft @ Fri 3rd February 2012, 7:27am) *

QUOTE(melloden @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 8:17pm) *

QUOTE(Fusion @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 10:50pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 2:48pm) *

Fae, as far as I know, was the only candidate to have been critiqued vigorously by the mainstream media.

Which mainstream media?

I'm really not sure.

O RLY?

I don't think you understood the irony there.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Zoloft
post Sat 4th February 2012, 8:38am
Post #17


May we all find solace in our dreams.
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,332
Joined: Fri 15th Jan 2010, 11:08pm
From: Erewhon
Member No.: 16,621



QUOTE(melloden @ Fri 3rd February 2012, 6:00pm) *

QUOTE(Zoloft @ Fri 3rd February 2012, 7:27am) *

QUOTE(melloden @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 8:17pm) *
QUOTE(Fusion @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 10:50pm) *
QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 2:48pm) *
Fae, as far as I know, was the only candidate to have been critiqued vigorously by the mainstream media.
Which mainstream media?
I'm really not sure.
O RLY?
I don't think you understood the irony there.

Mea Culpa.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th 12 17, 12:48pm