Useful links Options

[Peter Damian]

This is for useful links to FT2-related topics not in this immediate thread, either in WR or elsewhere on the net.

Neurolinguistic programming

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&sh...ndpost&p=111637 - list of articles on NLP which FT2 began or extensively edited, or both.

Headley Down

FT2, Fainites, NLP whitewash and booting anti-pedophiles
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showt...107&hl=fainites

Jimmy Wales, Katefan0, FT2, and the NLP cult., Cranks, bestiality, and admin promotion
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showt...078&hl=fainites

The HeadleyDown 'long term abuse page'. This is helpfully maintained by FT2 and is the one that contains the extraordinary advice on how to spot an HD sock, namely if the editor acts as the "sweet voice of a reasonable editor", claiming to have a scientific or neutral interest, seeking minor improvements, POV fixes, balance, or a legitimate "scientific/neutral" viewpoint. Has a good list of all the Headley socks, which I am working through at the moment to see if the sock actually was abusive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Lon...use/HeadleyDown

The oversighted edits

The edits to the Zoophilia article which were FT2's first edits (as FT2) to Wikipedia, and which were oversighted on December 8 2007.

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&sh...indpost&p=95284

Plus (just published today, Sat 5 July) the admission by Wikipedia bureaucrat Will Scribe that the edits really were oversighted (which Wikipedia has never officially admitted). Jimbo and Cary Bass were involved, Scribe only 'saw the email'.

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&sh...ndpost&p=111850


Wikipedophilia

Erik Moeller accusations
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=17902

Boy scouts are for spanking. One of the most popular threads on Wikipedia Review. The Review discovered a paedophilia Wiki (showing underaged children in various states of undress, being spanked). Wales personally removed the Wiki.
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=15438

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Mon 14th July 2008, 9:26am

[guy]

the extraordinary advice on how to spot an HD sock, namely if the editor acts as the "sweet voice of a reasonable editor", claiming to have a scientific or neutral interest, seeking minor improvements, POV fixes, balance, or a legitimate "scientific/neutral" viewpoint.

So User:Newport was an HD sock?