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
> Admin Od Mishehu and serious BLP vandalism
Wikileaker
post Wed 6th July 2011, 4:51pm
Post #1


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri 15th Feb 2008, 7:07pm
Member No.: 4,864



Bah, I'm going to get in on this too.

----

[Arbcom-l] Admin Od Mishehu and serious BLP vandalism

Thatcher131 Wikipedia <thatcher131@gmail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 2:30 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
In January, the Office received a complaint from [[Greg Ryan
(soccer)]] that his bio had been vandalized with a claim that he was
fired for being caught wearing women's underwear, and as a result he
had lost a job that he was interviewing for. At that time the vandal
edit was too old to checkuser. However it has just been reinstated:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=201216572

Checkuser shows the IP is currently used by Admin:Od Mishehu and the
user agents are a spot-on match.

Thatcher

_______________________________________________
Arbcom-l mailing list
Arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l
Josh Gordon <user.jpgordon@gmail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 2:48 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
It might be a lot worse than that. A checkuser on the offending editor reveals what really seems to be two dozen throwaway accounts, some blocked already, some not -- and they're all carefully interleaved with [[User:Od Mishehu]]. (OM edits, then creates a new account, does a bit of stuff, and then starts working as OM again.)

Obviously Thatcher & I think something is up here; I'd venture it's real quick to deadmin first, ask questions later, but perhaps I'm missing some subtlety.

--
--jpgordon ∇∆∇∆
_______________________________________________
Arbcom-l mailing list
Arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l

David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 2:53 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>, thatcher131@gmail.com
On 14/04/2008, Thatcher131 Wikipedia <thatcher131@gmail.com> wrote:

> In January, the Office received a complaint from [[Greg Ryan
> (soccer)]] that his bio had been vandalized with a claim that he was
> fired for being caught wearing women's underwear, and as a result he
> had lost a job that he was interviewing for. At that time the vandal
> edit was too old to checkuser. However it has just been reinstated:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=201216572
>
> Checkuser shows the IP is currently used by Admin:Od Mishehu and the
> user agents are a spot-on match.


I just had a look as well. The user agent is the fairly distinctive:

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.1) Gecko/20061205
Iceweasel/2.0.0.1 (Debian-2.0.0.1+dfsg-2)

The editing times show fairly clearly (to me) that User:Drhhdxhfstru
was created and used for these edits in the middle of a User:Od
Mishehu editing session.

I think he's nailed. The question is then what the AC consider
appropriate - e.g. "we saw these edits from your IP in the middle of
one of your editing sessions. I hope you can have a word with whoever
did this and make sure it *never happens again*." Without revealing
the user agent aspect. Up to you.


- d.

Thatcher131 Wikipedia <thatcher131@gmail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
There are 20+ vandal accounts on that IP, not just the Greg Ryan
business. It does not look shared; all the edits are the same unusual
user agent.

David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
On 14/04/2008, Josh Gordon <user.jpgordon@gmail.com> wrote:

> It might be a lot worse than that. A checkuser on the offending editor
> reveals what really seems to be two dozen throwaway accounts, some blocked
> already, some not -- and they're all carefully interleaved with [[User:Od
> Mishehu]]. (OM edits, then creates a new account, does a bit of stuff, and
> then starts working as OM again.)


eek - I looked again and you are of course quite correct. He's playing
silly buggers big time. (All on the same distinctive useragent too.)


- d.

Thatcher131 Wikipedia <thatcher131@gmail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 2:57 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com>
Cc: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
I hope this is not overlooked. This is not like the admin I caught
making a one-off silly buggers vandalism to Newyorkbrad's talk page
(which could even have been a school chum or something). This is a
long-term problem, and unless he was trolling the histories of BLPs
looking for bad stuff to reinstate, he must have been the original
vandal as well.

T.

David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 2:57 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>, Thatcher131 Wikipedia <thatcher131@gmail.com>
On 14/04/2008, Thatcher131 Wikipedia <thatcher131@gmail.com> wrote:

> There are 20+ vandal accounts on that IP, not just the Greg Ryan
> business. It does not look shared; all the edits are the same unusual
> user agent.


Concur. He's playing silly buggers routinely.

To what extent is this of serious consequence? Certainly adding
dubious material to BLPs that he obviously doesn't stand by is pretty
serious.


- d.

Josh Gordon <user.jpgordon@gmail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 3:15 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
I'm dropping him a polite note, just to be nice; I suspect we'll end up in an emergency deadmin situation.

--
--jpgordon ∇∆∇∆
_______________________________________________
Arbcom-l mailing list
Arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l

Thatcher131 Wikipedia <thatcher131@gmail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 3:18 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com>
Cc: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Mike_lifeguard ran an nmap scan (from #wikimedia-checkuser), the
results are here

http://pastey.net/85777

It looks like port 80 and 8080 are open, but he could not actually connect.

This could be a parallel to a recent case I investigated where the
proxy replace the user agent of whomever connected with its own user
agent. However, that was a closed proxy that only the authorized
user(s) could access.

His time of day editing shows a very narrow window on
Sunday--Thursday. If this was a real proxy I would expect to see
edits at other times of day. I think this is a work IP address. I
wonder if he edits from home under a different account(s).

If it is a work IP it could be a shared IP or firewall but the user
agent would need to be explained, also the timing. Do any of the
vandal accounts occur on days when Od does not work, or at times when
he is not active at all?

T.

Josh Gordon <user.jpgordon@gmail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 3:27 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Cc: thatcher131@gmail.com
By the way, the name means something like "another one".

--
--jpgordon ∇∆∇∆
_______________________________________________
Arbcom-l mailing list
Arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l

Sam Blacketer <sam.blacketer@googlemail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 3:30 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 9:15 PM, Josh Gordon <user.jpgordon@gmail.com> wrote:

I'm dropping him a polite note, just to be nice; I suspect we'll end up in an emergency deadmin situation


I'm afraid it looks so, but let's hear from him first.

There's no doubt that the IP is him given that he edited his user talk page while logged out once: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=183208748

Inspired by the odd wording of the vandal edit which drew attention to this in the first place (including the spelling mistake "bizzarre") I've been looking at some of his contributions. Very interested in Harry Potter, but one distinct thing is overuse of the letter 'z' - he invariably uses the '-ize' spelling even in words like 'advertise' for which it is not an accepted alternative to '-ise'.

--
Sam Blacketer

_______________________________________________
Arbcom-l mailing list
Arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l

jayjg <jayjg99@gmail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:14 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Josh Gordon <user.jpgordon@gmail.com> wrote:
> It might be a lot worse than that. A checkuser on the offending editor
> reveals what really seems to be two dozen throwaway accounts, some blocked
> already, some not -- and they're all carefully interleaved with [[User:Od
> Mishehu]]. (OM edits, then creates a new account, does a bit of stuff, and
> then starts working as OM again.)

He's blocked some of them himself - "Ata tipesh", for example, one of
the earliest. Perhaps he was testing to see how a block of one of the
accounts would affect him.

FT2 <ft2.wiki@gmail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 6:09 PM
Reply-To: FT2.wiki@gmail.com, Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
I've done a dump of the edits for the last 3 months, and a few points where
I find myself wondering what's up.

For example, 09 Mar 2008 13:44 has 3 edits, one by Od, one by a junk account
(also linux, different agent), then one by Od, all in the space of 60
seconds. Two separate computers on one LAN? One computer two browsers?

Ditto
09 Mar 2008 13:21-35 (same agent)
09 Mar 2008 09:13-16 (same agent)
25 Feb 2008 14:15-21 (same agent)
23 Jan 2008 06:57-07:03 (same agent)
23 Jan 2008 06:55-57 (same agent)
Etc

It's reasonable that a person or office with multiple computers often keeps
the same system and browser on each - I know I do. What do people read into
the sheer rapidity of change of account? Take a look at the login repeated
rapid changes between 23 Jan 2008 06:46-07:05.

My question is, is this Od, or is this someone else on his LAN? I don't know
how to answer that, but it's worth considering. Either way it's a problem.


One other thing:

Jayjg notes that Od blocked one of these other accounts on his own IP. I
looked into that a bit, because that's usually a big warning light.
Specifically, on Jan 15, Od blocked "Ata tipesh" for bad username (insulting
in Hebrew per block log). Interestingly, he disabled autoblock for it.
However further checking indicates that Od is a regular and heavy duty
username patroller, so he does a lot of these, and /all/ his username blocks
are autoblock-disabled, so this probably means little to nothing. Noted "in
case useful".

Paul.




On Behalf Of Sam Blacketer
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 9:31 PM
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list
Subject: Re: [Arbcom-l] Admin Od Mishehu and serious BLP vandalism


_______________________________________________
Arbcom-l mailing list
Arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l


Od Mishehu.xls
1832K
Sam Blacketer <sam.blacketer@googlemail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 6:22 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: FT2.wiki@gmail.com, Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 12:09 AM, FT2 <ft2.wiki@gmail.com> wrote:


It's reasonable that a person or office with multiple computers often keeps
the same system and browser on each - I know I do. What do people read into
the sheer rapidity of change of account?


I'm wondering whether Od has work colleagues who have spotted him editing Wikipedia and like to wind him up.

--
Sam Blacketer

_______________________________________________
Arbcom-l mailing list
Arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l

FloNight <sydney.poore@gmail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 6:24 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Rapidly changing accounts seems to link him to the accounts not the reverse.

Sydney


FT2 <ft2.wiki@gmail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 6:31 PM
Reply-To: FT2.wiki@gmail.com, Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Is there a point where such rapid change is less likely to be one person,
not more? 3 edits separated by 2 name changes, all within 60 seconds? I'm
wondering if that might sound more like 2 computers, in which case - who's
at the second one?


-----Original Message-----
On Behalf Of FloNight
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 12:25 AM
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list
Subject: Re: [Arbcom-l] Admin Od Mishehu and serious BLP vandalism


Jimmy Wales <jwales@wikia.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 9:03 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: FT2.wiki@gmail.com, Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>

It is always *theoretically* possible that a case of what looks like
clear sockpuppeting is a roommate or office mate who is trying to "wind
someone up" by laying a trap taking months, matching an obscure browser
string, vandalizing at precise times to make it look like... blah blah blah.

But it is also quite unlikely.

One thing that would be nice: if checkuser could see "logout" actions.
In a case like the present case, that would be pretty conclusive.

--Jimbo

Stephen Bain <stephen.bain@gmail.com> Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 10:04 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 5:53 AM, David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I just had a look as well. The user agent is the fairly distinctive:
>
> Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.1) Gecko/20061205
> Iceweasel/2.0.0.1 (Debian-2.0.0.1+dfsg-2)

Iceweasel is the branded name for Firefox packaged with the Debian
distribution, if anyone didn't know, and using bundled software is not
terribly distinctive. However, we can also see that it's version
2.0.0.1 of Firefox, the December 2006 build. He's running Debian with
the X window system on a Pentium Pro computer.

As FT2 says, it's not uncommon for people in an office or on a home
LAN to run the same software setup, but each computer would have to be
using a Pentium Pro processor too, and all running that same old
version of Firefox, and I know that Firefox is constantly bugging me
to download the newest version.

--
Stephen Bain
stephen.bain@gmail.com

Theresa Knott <theresaknott@gmail.com> Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 3:05 AM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
In the school where I work, only one person is authorised to add new
software, all computers run the same operating system and have the
same browser, most of the computers are exactly the same in every way
having been brought as a job lot and set up once and not updated much
at all (if ever).

Just playing devil's advocate.

Theresa

--

http://theresaknott.googlepages.com/home
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Theresa_knott

Stephen Bain <stephen.bain@gmail.com> Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 4:08 AM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 6:05 PM, Theresa Knott <theresaknott@gmail.com> wrote:
> In the school where I work, only one person is authorised to add new
> software, all computers run the same operating system and have the
> same browser, most of the computers are exactly the same in every way
> having been brought as a job lot and set up once and not updated much
> at all (if ever).
>
> Just playing devil's advocate.

Yes, an important point to observe. But how many businesses or schools
run Debian on all their machines? My guess would be not many.

--

FT2 <ft2.wiki@gmail.com> Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 4:17 AM
Reply-To: FT2.wiki@gmail.com, Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
-----Original Message-----
On Behalf Of Stephen Bain
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 10:08 AM
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list
Subject: Re: [Arbcom-l] Admin Od Mishehu and serious BLP vandalism

On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 6:05 PM, Theresa Knott <theresaknott@gmail.com>
wrote:
> In the school where I work, only one person is authorised to add new
> software, all computers run the same operating system and have the
> same browser, most of the computers are exactly the same in every way
> having been brought as a job lot and set up once and not updated much
> at all (if ever).
>
> Just playing devil's advocate.

Yes, an important point to observe. But how many businesses or schools
run Debian on all their machines? My guess would be not many.

--
Stephen Bain
stephen.bain@gmail.com


If there's one knowledgable person running a LAN, they'll often set up all
systems as they see fit. Example, I do the "sysadmin" for my parents PC's at
their home, and I configure them all the same way, because basically, that's
the setup I think's best for them and I wouldn't set up two different kinds.
Likewise most homes with multiple PCs and one person managing them all.

If Od lives with others or at home (quite likely) then its quite likely he
(or some person) manages the different PCs -- his, his dads, his kid
brothers, whatever -- and they'll all have debian + firefox or whatever it
is.

Hence my question, given rapidity of change of user and edits, is it more
likely this is two computers on a LAN, or one? And if two, same person at
both, or two different people?


Paul.

Josh Gordon <user.jpgordon@gmail.com> Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 4:00 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
He denies any knowledge of this, of course. He does say he's editing at his workplace and that he knows his IP has been used for vandalism.

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Josh Gordon <user.jpgordon@gmail.com> wrote:




--
--jpgordon ∇∆∇∆
_______________________________________________
Arbcom-l mailing list
Arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l

Josh Gordon <user.jpgordon@gmail.com> Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 11:36 PM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
The more I look at the evidence the less confident am I that wrongdoing has occurred. The intervals are too short; either he's a totally bent admin, working with two computers side-by-side, or there's some other shit at the company and he's not involved at all.

I'd suggest anon-only, no account creation blocking of the IP, and see what happens next.

--
--jpgordon ∇∆∇∆
_______________________________________________
Arbcom-l mailing list
Arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l

FT2 <ft2.wiki@gmail.com> Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 5:01 AM
Reply-To: FT2.wiki@gmail.com, Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
On Behalf Of Josh Gordon
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 5:37 AM
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list
Subject: Re: [Arbcom-l] Admin Od Mishehu and serious BLP vandalism

The more I look at the evidence the less confident am I that wrongdoing has occurred. The intervals are too short; either he's a totally bent admin, working with two computers side-by-side, or there's some other shit at the company and he's not involved at all.

I'd suggest anon-only, no account creation blocking of the IP, and see what happens next.



I was thinking likewise. Given that as an admin he can edit through a hard IP block, I was thinking of hard-blocking the IP rather than soft-blocking. Same rationale though.

Thoughts?

Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) <newyorkbrad@gmail.com> Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 6:33 AM
Reply-To: Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
To: FT2.wiki@gmail.com, Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
I will certainly trust Josh and FT2's recommendations on this, but
could one of you please give Thatcher an update and keep him in the
loop.

Newyorkbrad
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
melloden
post Wed 6th July 2011, 5:55pm
Post #2


.
****

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



Now, how did you get access to these threads? Don't tell me ArbCom was hacked by two people hmmm.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wikileaker
post Wed 6th July 2011, 6:08pm
Post #3


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri 15th Feb 2008, 7:07pm
Member No.: 4,864



I used to be an arbitrator and posted a couple (?) threads a few years ago. You can go through my posting history to see them.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
No one of consequence
post Wed 6th July 2011, 6:49pm
Post #4


I want to stare at the seaside and do nothing at all
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri 23rd Feb 2007, 2:34am
Member No.: 1,010

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Wikileaker @ Wed 6th July 2011, 4:51pm) *

Bah, I'm going to get in on this too.

Unfortunately, this forum now suffers from the same problem as Arbcom-L (or at least, one of the problems): too much information to process. Stuff just gets lost.

QUOTE(Wikileaker @ Wed 6th July 2011, 6:08pm) *

I used to be an arbitrator and posted a couple (?) threads a few years ago. You can go through my posting history to see them.

That's surprisingly direct. But then again, I haven't been paying much attention lately.

As far as the case is concerned, the remedy of blocking the IP against account creation and use by non-admins was functional enough, but it didn't deal with the issue of a trusted admin committing vandalism (and possibly libel) against a real living person.

As I said, oh well.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
melloden
post Wed 6th July 2011, 7:09pm
Post #5


.
****

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



QUOTE(Wikileaker @ Wed 6th July 2011, 6:08pm) *

I used to be an arbitrator and posted a couple (?) threads a few years ago. You can go through my posting history to see them.


I'm trying to figure out who you are. But it's not really working. Is your identity a secret for a reason? Are you still an active editor?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Zoloft
post Wed 6th July 2011, 7:33pm
Post #6


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 @ Wed 6th July 2011, 12:09pm) *

QUOTE(Wikileaker @ Wed 6th July 2011, 6:08pm) *

I used to be an arbitrator and posted a couple (?) threads a few years ago. You can go through my posting history to see them.


I'm trying to figure out who you are. But it's not really working. Is your identity a secret for a reason? Are you still an active editor?

How's about you, melloden? Why don't you light up your Wikipedia identity at least?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
melloden
post Wed 6th July 2011, 8:35pm
Post #7


.
****

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



QUOTE(Zoloft @ Wed 6th July 2011, 7:33pm) *

QUOTE(melloden @ Wed 6th July 2011, 12:09pm) *

QUOTE(Wikileaker @ Wed 6th July 2011, 6:08pm) *

I used to be an arbitrator and posted a couple (?) threads a few years ago. You can go through my posting history to see them.


I'm trying to figure out who you are. But it's not really working. Is your identity a secret for a reason? Are you still an active editor?

How's about you, melloden? Why don't you light up your Wikipedia identity at least?

It's irrelevant for WR purposes, because I haven't used it in ages and I never really did anything with it. But also it would connect me to someone I dealt with a few years ago who I'd rather not talk to again. Anyway, I'm just curious as to whether Wikileaker is more like Kelly Martin or rather someone who still cares about Wikipedia.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wikileaker
post Wed 6th July 2011, 8:42pm
Post #8


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri 15th Feb 2008, 7:07pm
Member No.: 4,864



Clean and serene for many years.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
melloden
post Wed 6th July 2011, 8:50pm
Post #9


.
****

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



QUOTE(Wikileaker @ Wed 6th July 2011, 8:42pm) *

Clean and serene for many years.

Clean as in clean from touching Wikipedia, or as in clean reputation on Wikipedia? Or both?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wikileaker
post Wed 6th July 2011, 10:50pm
Post #10


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri 15th Feb 2008, 7:07pm
Member No.: 4,864



Haha, it's a common maxim among recovering drug addicts.

I haven't touched Wikipedia in several years.

This post has been edited by Wikileaker: Wed 6th July 2011, 10:50pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rhindle
post Wed 6th July 2011, 11:04pm
Post #11


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 324
Joined: Mon 30th Jun 2008, 8:51pm
Member No.: 6,834



Click this link, it's some goooood shit
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Shalom
post Wed 6th July 2011, 11:57pm
Post #12


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 880
Joined: Tue 1st Apr 2008, 4:00pm
Member No.: 5,566



Od Mishehu should be desysopped. It's not too late. As I wrote regarding Good Olfactory: there is no statute of limitations.

Can you imagine any administrator vandalizing a BLP with sockpuppets by adding an unsourced accusation (even if true) that the man was wearing women's undergarments? I know that Nabla was caught (actually, kinda outed himself) vandalizing some articles but the edits were not considered outrageous and he was allowed to keep his tools - a consistent decision given the lack of community de-adminship. (I would have voted for letting Nabla stay a sysop if I were on ArbCom last month.) This is different. Od Mishehu allegedly used many sockpuppets for vandalizing. It's serious troublemaking that allegedly hurt an individual in real life. This behavior is completely unacceptable for an administrator.

You might ask: isn't there a certain other user who vandalized with sockpuppets?

Yes. That's the whole point. The day I am granted adminship by the community will be the day that Od Mishehu has a moral right to keep his adminship. The hypocrisy marches on.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Thu 7th July 2011, 12:48am
Post #13


blah
*********

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

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Blah blah blah.

Is someone going to go and actually apologize to Greg Ryan?
This happened shortly after he lost his job as the US women's soccer team.
That was in September 2007. In January 2008 he sent the complaint to the WMF.

I'm amazed he didn't sue. Maybe he did, and we don't know about it.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
No one of consequence
post Thu 7th July 2011, 1:13am
Post #14


I want to stare at the seaside and do nothing at all
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri 23rd Feb 2007, 2:34am
Member No.: 1,010

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Thu 7th July 2011, 12:48am) *

I'm amazed he didn't sue. Maybe he did, and we don't know about it.

The vandal edit was entered here, on 5 October 2007. It had nothing to do with his position as US Soccer coach.

On 23 January 2008, Ryan contacted the WMF, complaining that the "women's undergarment" incident had been brought up in an interview for a new job. Cary Bass came on IRC and asked me what I could find out about the editor. Since it was more than 90 days, there was no checkuser data, so all we could do was fix the article and block the vandal.

On 13 April 2008, after protection expired, a new vandal reinstated the bad edit. This time the article was on my watch list and I fixed it, blocked and checkusered the vandal the next day.

So Mr. Ryan is probably unaware to this day that his article was re-vandalized and that the WMF does (or did) have technical information regarding the identity of the second vandal. The fact that the first bad edit survived unchallenged for more than 90 days is the real shame. The second vandal edit was removed in 12 hours. Because the edit is so obscure, I consider it likely that the second vandal is the same as the first. But there is no proof. And even if he did sue, my understanding is that Section 230 protects the WMF as long as it takes action against the vandal and removes the bad info. And, the vandal's IP is outside US jurisdiction.

This post has been edited by No one of consequence: Thu 7th July 2011, 1:13am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ottava
post Thu 7th July 2011, 1:25am
Post #15


Über Pokemon
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,917
Joined: Thu 31st Jul 2008, 6:35pm
Member No.: 7,328

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Zoloft @ Wed 6th July 2011, 3:33pm) *

QUOTE(melloden @ Wed 6th July 2011, 12:09pm) *

I'm trying to figure out who you are. But it's not really working. Is your identity a secret for a reason? Are you still an active editor?

How's about you, melloden? Why don't you light up your Wikipedia identity at least?



For the record (if anyone is wondering), I am user Ottava Rima, and I haven't the foggiest clue who the rest of y'all are. tongue.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kelly Martin
post Thu 7th July 2011, 5:05am
Post #16


Bring back the guttersnipes!
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 3,270
Joined: Sun 22nd Jun 2008, 4:41am
From: EN61bw
Member No.: 6,696



QUOTE(melloden @ Wed 6th July 2011, 3:35pm) *
Anyway, I'm just curious as to whether Wikileaker is more like Kelly Martin or rather someone who still cares about Wikipedia.
You know, I used to care about Wikipedia. The reason I stopped caring is I realized that there was no hope for it, and the best thing that could be done for it is to put it out of its misery, as cleanly and quietly as possible. Rather like the way you regretfully take your beloved 19-year old cat to the vet to be put to sleep when he can no longer walk or eat on his own. Although Wikipedia was never as healthy as that old cat, not ever.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
radek
post Thu 7th July 2011, 5:28am
Post #17


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 699
Joined: Sat 28th Nov 2009, 10:40pm
Member No.: 15,651

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Thu 7th July 2011, 12:05am) *

QUOTE(melloden @ Wed 6th July 2011, 3:35pm) *
Anyway, I'm just curious as to whether Wikileaker is more like Kelly Martin or rather someone who still cares about Wikipedia.
You know, I used to care about Wikipedia. The reason I stopped caring is I realized that there was no hope for it, and the best thing that could be done for it is to put it out of its misery, as cleanly and quietly as possible. Rather like the way you regretfully take your beloved 19-year old cat to the vet to be put to sleep when he can no longer walk or eat on his own. Although Wikipedia was never as healthy as that old cat, not ever.


I think one should distinguish between 'caring about Wikipedia for its own sake' and 'caring about Wikipedia because of its impact on the broader world'. Pretty much anyone who edits here on WR regularly probably has already given up on the first one. In that sense, it IS like a senile cat that needs to be put out of its misery. But the second reason is still a valid, though perverse, motivation.


I hate the fact that I have to deal with student papers that come complete with nonsense pulled from Wikipedia articles - hence, at the end of the day, given that this beast exists, I would rather that it be more accurate rather than less. And I can extrapolate that to other areas of my interest - given that people are going to - rightly or wrongly, foolishly or not - get their information from this source, it'd be better if they got information that is more accurate (ahem, "encyclopedic") than less. So I still care about the quality of content and hope to improve it. Though the stock of patience/commitment even for this reason is running low...

That's the perverse logic of this monstrosity - I edit it even as I despise it. In a way it reminds me of what happens in the dollar auction. Once you're in, you're caught. To that extent I understand the people who want to "hasten the day" though I don't agree with them - we're way too far off from the threshold/tipping point where that kind of strategy, never mind its sketchy ethics, even begins to be viable. It's more like a cat that just won't die so you might as well give it morphine to make its life bearable (ok, not a perfect analogy either).

(edit: I just went and removed a bunch of nonsense of exactly the sort I'm talking about from the Dollar Auction article itself)

This post has been edited by radek: Thu 7th July 2011, 5:52am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Thu 7th July 2011, 6:15am
Post #18


blah
*********

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

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Wed 6th July 2011, 10:05pm) *
The reason I stopped caring is I realized that there was no hope for it, and the best thing that could be done for it is to put it out of its misery, as cleanly and quietly as possible.

Unfortunately, so many outright lunatics want to keep it going, it won't be "clean and quiet".
It'll be ugly, public, sad, and disturbing.

Ask Enric Naval, or Orangemike, or Tiptoety, or any number of other obsessed admins.
Assuming you can get their attention, and get something coherent out of them, that is.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Sololol
post Thu 7th July 2011, 7:51pm
Post #19


Bell the Cat
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun 10th Apr 2011, 6:32am
Member No.: 50,538

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Wed 6th July 2011, 8:48pm) *

Blah blah blah.

Is someone going to go and actually apologize to Greg Ryan?
This happened shortly after he lost his job as the US women's soccer team.
That was in September 2007. In January 2008 he sent the complaint to the WMF.

I'm amazed he didn't sue. Maybe he did, and we don't know about it.

It would have been interesting if he had. This was one of the situations identified by that 2006 Harvard paper "Wikimmunity" in which the WMF might not have Section 230 protection. Would have been a hell of a long shot for Ryan but might have answered some of the legal questions surrounding WMF's liability for volunteer actions versus section 230 immunities.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gruntled
post Fri 8th July 2011, 12:54pm
Post #20


Quite an unusual member
***

Group: On Vacation
Posts: 222
Joined: Tue 2nd Feb 2010, 12:23pm
Member No.: 16,954



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Thu 7th July 2011, 7:15am) *

Ask Enric Naval, or Orangemike, or Tiptoety, or any number of other obsessed admins.

Err ... due to some inexplicable oversight, Enric isn't actually an admin.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th 11 17, 2:17am