Requests for new "Notable Editors" fora Options

I would like to add "Walloon" and Willbeback" as well as "DTobias" who actually threatened me in a harmful way in writing. You can read the scathing discussion on the article about our company at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:American...mpany/archive_1

We even reported these individuals to federal authorities it got so bad.

Thanks!

Thomas R. Bond II
Biograph Company

I would like to add "Walloon" and Willbeback" as well as "DTobias" who actually threatened me in a harmful way in writing. You can read the scathing discussion on the article about our company at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:American...mpany/archive_1

We even reported these individuals to federal authorities it got so bad.

Thanks!

Thomas R. Bond II
Biograph Company

It looks to me like you were threatening people with a lawsuit so that they'd let you write the article how you wished.

It looks to me like you were threatening people with a lawsuit so that they'd let you write the article how you wished.

Hmm, I'd like to see the WP:COI and WP:V interpretation for the self-reference to their own website that asserts they are going to start filming on the moon - in 2008. Come on, NASA can barely get the space shuttle into orbit and back, let alone send all the caterers required for a proper film shoot all that way.

I would like to add "Walloon" and Willbeback" as well as "DTobias" who actually threatened me in a harmful way in writing. You can read the scathing discussion on the article about our company at:

(IMG:http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb311/Kato90125/Katosmileyhappy.jpg)

I'm flattered to be nominated, and I thank my mom and dad and... Well, wait a minute, I looked at the page you linked, and I didn't even see any comments by myself there, though I'm sure I did comment on the silliness of some of your claims back when you were blustering about them.

I would like to add "Walloon" and Willbeback" as well as "DTobias" who actually threatened me in a harmful way in writing. You can read the scathing discussion on the article about our company at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:American...mpany/archive_1

We even reported these individuals to federal authorities it got so bad.

Thanks!

Thomas R. Bond II
Biograph Company

It looks to me like you were threatening people with a lawsuit so that they'd let you write the article how you wished.

No, we do not tollerate having false information on the company. This is why we proposed legal recourse, the the article the way "We" wanted it. If a group writes false or misleading information, then it is up to that said individual to respond. It is amazing how many "Wikipedeans" come over to WR (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

I would like to add "Walloon" and Willbeback" as well as "DTobias" who actually threatened me in a harmful way in writing. You can read the scathing discussion on the article about our company at:

(IMG:http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb311/Kato90125/Katosmileyhappy.jpg)

Thank you Kato. Also, thanks for the link and being fair.

It looks to me like you were threatening people with a lawsuit so that they'd let you write the article how you wished.

Hmm, I'd like to see the WP:COI and WP:V interpretation for the self-reference to their own website that asserts they are going to start filming on the moon - in 2008. Come on, NASA can barely get the space shuttle into orbit and back, let alone send all the caterers required for a proper film shoot all that way.

Wow, the moon again... And, insults to boot! This is really relevant to if the company (Ours) is Biograph Company. I see... Again, how many of you "Wikipedeans are coming over to WR now? Hmmmmm (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

It looks to me like you were threatening people with a lawsuit so that they'd let you write the article how you wished.

Hmm, I'd like to see the WP:COI and WP:V interpretation for the self-reference to their own website that asserts they are going to start filming on the moon - in 2008. Come on, NASA can barely get the space shuttle into orbit and back, let alone send all the caterers required for a proper film shoot all that way.

One note I will leave, since I will not be replying to any other unusual postings. We are happy to be Biograph Company. We are happy and honored to be the oldest movie company in America. We are happy that we are recognized by legitimate organizations, publications, government credentials, and awards. It is very sad that the only "Small" world that enjoys falsehoods, vengence and yellow journalism is "Wikipedia" and that most of the unqualified editors without merit or background enjoy boasting of themselves while hurting others. It takes really "Big" people to do this. In essence, it is not "Defending" or "Rebuttal" but a battle that I do not want a part of. It is also very pathetic that individuals have nothing better to do with thier time than to build false credentials of being "Editors" out of thier basements or bedrooms, when they cannot accomplish anything in the "Real" world. "Wikipedia" will continue on its course, and many will follow with the attitude of descent. But it is not just irony that these poor individuals are harming themselves by harming others, but that they are not even aware of the harm they commit to themselves.

We do thank all of our supporters at WR keep up the good work.

This post has been edited by biographco:

We are happy and honored to be the oldest movie company in America.

I don't see why a company is surprised that there are sarcastic comments about its presentation of its view of the world when that company plays such silly games as suggesting that having been dormant for 70 years and then using the same brand name gives some claim to fame that they were the last company to convert to sound. The repetition of self-congratulatory puff pieces is exactly the sort of thing that brings Wikipedia into disrepute and is why the conflict of interest policy is required.

By all means put all the fantasy advertising exaggerations and distortions on your own web site, but don't be surprised that you get called on it. You don't seem to like Walloon because he is quite rightly questioning the validity of the company's claims, and when you called him on it, he produced some pretty good research to back up his position.

I'm pretty sure that WR members are independent thinkers and are not your supporters just because we have concerns about the operation of WP.

We are happy and honored to be the oldest movie company in America.

I don't see why a company is surprised that there are sarcastic comments about its presentation of its view of the world when that company plays such silly games as suggesting that having been dormant for 70 years and then using the same brand name gives some claim to fame that they were the last company to convert to sound. The repetition of self-congratulatory puff pieces is exactly the sort of thing that brings Wikipedia into disrepute and is why the conflict of interest policy is required.

By all means put all the fantasy advertising exaggerations and distortions on your own web site, but don't be surprised that you get called on it. You don't seem to like Walloon because he is quite rightly questioning the validity of the company's claims, and when you called him on it, he produced some pretty good research to back up his position.

I'm pretty sure that WR members are independent thinkers and are not your supporters just because we have concerns about the operation of WP.

We are happy and honored to be the oldest movie company in America.

I don't see why a company is surprised that there are sarcastic comments about its presentation of its view of the world when that company plays such silly games as suggesting that having been dormant for 70 years and then using the same brand name gives some claim to fame that they were the last company to convert to sound. The repetition of self-congratulatory puff pieces is exactly the sort of thing that brings Wikipedia into disrepute and is why the conflict of interest policy is required.

By all means put all the fantasy advertising exaggerations and distortions on your own web site, but don't be surprised that you get called on it. You don't seem to like Walloon because he is quite rightly questioning the validity of the company's claims, and when you called him on it, he produced some pretty good research to back up his position.

I'm pretty sure that WR members are independent thinkers and are not your supporters just because we have concerns about the operation of WP.

We are happy and honored to be the oldest movie company in America.

I don't see why a company is surprised that there are sarcastic comments about its presentation of its view of the world when that company plays such silly games as suggesting that having been dormant for 70 years and then using the same brand name gives some claim to fame that they were the last company to convert to sound. The repetition of self-congratulatory puff pieces is exactly the sort of thing that brings Wikipedia into disrepute and is why the conflict of interest policy is required.

By all means put all the fantasy advertising exaggerations and distortions on your own web site, but don't be surprised that you get called on it. You don't seem to like Walloon because he is quite rightly questioning the validity of the company's claims, and when you called him on it, he produced some pretty good research to back up his position.

I'm pretty sure that WR members are independent thinkers and are not your supporters just because we have concerns about the operation of WP.

We are happy and honored to be the oldest movie company in America.

I don't see why a company is surprised that there are sarcastic comments about its presentation of its view of the world when that company plays such silly games as suggesting that having been dormant for 70 years and then using the same brand name gives some claim to fame that they were the last company to convert to sound. The repetition of self-congratulatory puff pieces is exactly the sort of thing that brings Wikipedia into disrepute and is why the conflict of interest policy is required.

By all means put all the fantasy advertising exaggerations and distortions on your own web site, but don't be surprised that you get called on it. You don't seem to like Walloon because he is quite rightly questioning the validity of the company's claims, and when you called him on it, he produced some pretty good research to back up his position.

I'm pretty sure that WR members are independent thinkers and are not your supporters just because we have concerns about the operation of WP.

This is very amusing how you over at Wikipedia (Not WR) enjoy invading WR and telling the people at WR the way they think! Bravo! We have no problem with sarcastic comments, or even your agenda of opinions, as long as it stays "Opinions". In this case, "Wikipedia" is stating this as verifiable "Fact". This we have a problem with. Denying all of the references positive about the company, and only including negative is complete bias and agenda driven. Also, why do you have a grudge againt this company? What is your hidden agenda? If you need to question any validity of ours, you are welcome to e-mail our legal represenative (NO - THIS IS NOT A LEGAL SUIT THREAT) for they represent us as an agent to an actor. Any questions you have can be verified.

On self-congradulatory, it shows you need to do your research a little better. We are not only documented, but recognized by others far more reputable than an amateur editors at Wikipedia.... Who is Walloon? What are his qualifications? What is his or her "Reputable background"? As I stated before, you hide behind the PC world to dish out barbs and insults, for it is safe. We are out in the open. Our contact information and references are there to be seen. Come out and play... No, you stay in the shadows. Again, I go back to our original statement, which you could not respond to, except for in a hostile and insulting way. That is your opinion, that is your freedom.

This post has been edited by biographco:

This is very amusing how you over at Wikipedia (Not WR) enjoy invading WR and telling the people at WR the way they think!

I'm just some guy, (certainly) not WP, not WR, though I would like to think I've got more of an idea about WR than you appear to have, and I'd like to think I am a little more the "We" of WR rather than the "They".

I make a simple point, that the public image you project from your website is not credible, it is marketing fluff. You can bluster and be offended, it may be that the approach works for your business where image is important, but I cannot see what you hope to achieve by arguing black is white. Stay away from zebra crossings!

This is very amusing how you over at Wikipedia (Not WR) enjoy invading WR and telling the people at WR the way they think!

I'm just some guy, (certainly) not WP, not WR, though I would like to think I've got more of an idea about WR than you appear to have, and I'd like to think I am a little more the "We" of WR rather than the "They".

I make a simple point, that the public image you project from your website is not credible, it is marketing fluff. You can bluster and be offended, it may be that the approach works for your business where image is important, but I cannot see what you hope to achieve by arguing black is white. Stay away from zebra crossings!

Sir, I could care less about opinions, and welcome criticism. Using the terminology that was used was inflamitory and aggressive. This is why the response was as it was. Many companies that are production have PR "Fluff" if you will. The Biograph Company is not "Fluff". We are very legitimate and real. We are and do legitimate business. WSe have no hidden agenda. We urge you to research and look. Any questions to anything we are completely open to, as long as it is presented in a non aggressive and logical way. That is all. And, put into a non aggressive inquiry, we have no problem with legitimate criticism or questions.

This post has been edited by biographco:

I think I'll wait for someone to make this thread into a movie.

I would like to add "Walloon" and Willbeback" as well as "DTobias" who actually threatened me in a harmful way in writing.

I am pleased to announce that Will Beback has made the cut! I've been rooting for him. DTobias, on the other hand, only has three threads devoted to his conduct, and Walloon isn't on the radar screen at all.

Note to Kato: we now have the Dirty Dozen.

I would like to add "Walloon" and Willbeback" as well as "DTobias" who actually threatened me in a harmful way in writing.

I am pleased to announce that Will Beback has made the cut! I've been rooting for him. DTobias, on the other hand, only has three threads devoted to his conduct, and Walloon isn't on the radar screen at all.

Note to Kato: we now have the Dirty Dozen.

Hi, this is great. However, you need to go to the our article page. Walloon is the spearhead, tons of nasty stuff.

This post has been edited by biographco:

Orangemarlin should be added to the list. He's a real piece of work (read: "crap"). You can read about some of his shenanigans here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...er:Orangemarlin

And you can read the ultimate outcome of that here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...20565263#Closed

Despite all this, Orangemarlin continues to toe the line with his comments.

I would like to add "Walloon" and Willbeback" as well as "DTobias" who actually threatened me in a harmful way in writing. You can read the scathing discussion on the article about our company at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:American...mpany/archive_1

We even reported these individuals to federal authorities it got so bad.

Thanks!

Thomas R. Bond II
Biograph Company

Where are the harmful threats? Where is the slander?

You again biographco. Really...

You again biographco. Really...

Nope, his post is from February; I was hoping he was still around to clarify.

You again biographco. Really...

Nope, his post is from February; I was hoping he was still around to clarify.

Oh thank god for that.

I'm afraid this is one of those instances where the "auto-close thread after x days" feature might have come in handy...

why has dtobias made comments such as the one at the bottom here, when he is actually on this forum? Was it before he joined or is he being tongue-in-cheek? You have to go in the actual main talk history to see some of the comments, rather than that archive. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=119293180

Is it time for this ID cabal to get their own subforum?

The Final Absolution

Is it time for this ID cabal to get their own subforum?

It's time for them to get their own Pythonesque Spammish Inquisition.

With 4-part harmony and 2-part melody.

(And some really painful lyrics.)

Giano II migth qualify for a subforum by now btw?

Please, a new Gwernol forum Long overdue.

GWERNOL's COI WATCHDOG FILES

[*] Half Dozen a Day COI Guy - Gwernol 07:59, 12 July 2008 (UTC). If you happen to have a webserver, MySQL, ...... I've found myself giving out up to half a dozen COI warnings a day now. ...
[*] About Boodles the Cat - Gwernol 17:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC). You have been blocked from editing for ...... One option is to designate a specific set of COI-affected editors who we ..
[*] Gwernol kicks IPTV off of Wikipedia (So what if it's a large company owned by the Lauder family? Gwernol says COI, Gwernol is right)- This link was deleted by Gwernol on the basis that it was a COI. As I have written extensively on this subject, and am very active in standards development, ... (and blah blah blah) Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-07-18 IPTV
[*] Don't Ever Write About Where You Work! - User talk:Eli Falk - The UCSC Wikipedia Trust Project
Best, Gwernol 17:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC) .... By the way, about writing an article about a school where you teach, I'd recommend looking at WP:COI. ..
[*] Gwernol, Telling it Like it Is - User talk:Ryan Keyes - The UCSC Wikipedia Trust Project
Best, Gwernol 03:31, 3 February 2007 (UTC) ... help editors create articles or resolve disputes some of the ones I recommend you read are WP:COI WP:RS WP:N ..
[*] Bagging on Bagley with COI - The Wikipedia Review > JzG: Wikipedia Review superfan
Bagley went to WP with COI proof. Unfortunately for him it was proof against the ..... FeloniousMonk, Gwernol, JustZisGuy, KillerChihuahua, and SlimVirgin. ...
[*] Gwernol Advises - User talk:Gnif global - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gwernol, if I find an peer-reviewed article from a blog, ... There's also the WP:COI issue; you shouldn't add your own work or group's work, rather suggest ...
[*] Gwernol Keeps it Clean - Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Radio - Wikipedia, the free ...
Procedural nomination Gwernol 09:34, 12 July 2008 (UTC) .... The article is written by the club historian, hence a WP:COI problem.
[url=http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:NobilityPublishing]
Gwernol Says "Dont Write About Your Own Company"[/url] - User talk:NobilityPublishing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Thank you, Gwernol 23:55, 23 July 2008 (UTC) ... Finally, you shouldn't be composing the article about your own company, see WP:COI. ...
[*] Gwernol 01:51, 12 May 2007 (UTC). Delete - It's not that notable of a game. ...... I also suggest that it falls under WP:COI, or WP:OR if you assume good ...
[*] Non-notable, no reliable sources, violates WP:AUTO and WP:COI. ...... Gwernol 19:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC); Delete not on the grounds of the poetry being bad, ...
[/list]

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey:

It appears Betacommand has a few threads about him (and more likely to follow before he's banned). Should we have a forum for him? The oldest thread goes back to April 2008.

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=20078
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=19227
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=19022
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=18212
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=14702

I'd like to see Jonathan Hochman [Jehochman] [added to the list, DUROVA mentored him.

If U do a Google search of his name + Wikipedia, U'll see how Hochman is in the business of canvassing clients so he can make Wiki articles about their company.

Most of his posts are in the administrative areas. He claims to like to write about shipwrecks but he's most busy banning people from 9/11 related articles. (See my userpage how he banned me.)

He graduated from Yale (a recruiting ground for CIA agents) and then went to work a few years in Russia (or maybe USSR then), the CIA would certainly have an interest in useing him as an asset. (Bush, Senior, went to Yale and later sold oil well drilling equipment in the USSR, as U know, Bush went on to head the CIA.

Big discussion at a 9/11 forum, with me included, about recent sockpuppet/meatpuppet investigation in the WP article about Controlled demolition of the WTC. Hochman and George William Herbert are also mentioned in the 9/11 forum thread.

I'd like to see Jonathan Hochman [Jehochman] [added to the list, DUROVA mentored him.

If U do a Google search of his name + Wikipedia, U'll see how Hochman is in the business of canvassing clients so he can make Wiki articles about their company.

Most of his posts are in the administrative areas. He claims to like to write about shipwrecks but he's most busy banning people from 9/11 related articles. (See my userpage how he banned me.)

He graduated from Yale (a recruiting ground for CIA agents) and then went to work a few years in Russia (or maybe USSR then), the CIA would certainly have an interest in useing him as an asset. (Bush, Senior, went to Yale and later sold oil well drilling equipment in the USSR, as U know, Bush went on to head the CIA.

Big discussion at a 9/11 forum, with me included, about recent sockpuppet/meatpuppet investigation in the WP article about Controlled demolition of the WTC. Hochman and George William Herbert are also mentioned in the 9/11 forum thread.

I think you will find that JH banned you under the consensus that your advocacy of The Controlled Demolition of the WTC was beginning to get beyond tiresome. You may find that the mods at WR have even less patience, especially if you start promoting the Jewish conspiracy angle as well.

Raquel Baranow's contrib history.

I think you will find that JH banned you under the consensus that your advocacy of The Controlled Demolition of the WTC was beginning to get beyond tiresome. You may find that the mods at WR have even less patience, especially if you start promoting the Jewish conspiracy angle as well.

My vote for understatement of the year. Can tell you're a Brit just for that one comment alone.

We don't do POV bans here. In fact, we do very few bans of any kind. Our members are entitled to conspiracy theorize to their hearts' content, provided they keep in mind that the overall objective of this forum is to provide a public service by illuminating the dark corners of WikiCorruption, and we frown on editors who try to supercede this mission with personal schticks and wakning. That said, the remedy is usually to move offending posts to the off-topic fora, not to ban the editor.

For more information on this topic, see our posting rules.

As far as a "notable editor" subforum for Jhochman is concerned, it has been a long time since we added one. As I recall, the criterion was five or more threads on the topic of the editor in question. It looks to me like Jehochman makes the cut. Are there any objections?

As far as a "notable editor" subforum for Jhochman is concerned, it has been a long time since we added one. As I recall, the criterion was five or more threads on the topic of the editor in question. It looks to me like Jehochman makes the cut. Are there any objections?

I'd question the need – all but one of those threads dates from last year, and most of them seem to be incidental to his spats with Durova and Elonka in 2008. No strong opinion, though.

Are there any objections?

He's a member here, so maybe we should just ask him? Most of those threads aren't really about him specifically - some may have started out that way, but he somehow ends up being a minor player in whatever dispute brought them about.

If we're essentially saying that these "Notable editors" subforums are a kind of "Hall of Shame" for egregiously nasty WP'ers, I'd probably vote against such a subforum for Mr. Hochman. I'm not sure he qualifies as "abusive," at least not chronically so... He's definitely over-officious, at times annoyingly smug, and I don't think he's the sort of person I'd want to hang out with on weekends. But if those things were the primary arbiters of who "gets in" and who doesn't, we'd have quite a few more of those subforums than we do now. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/blink.gif)

Point taken, and also the point about most of his threads being outdated. Let's see what others have to say.

We don't do POV bans here. In fact, we do very few bans of any kind. Our members are entitled to conspiracy theorize to their hearts' content, provided they keep in mind that the overall objective of this forum is to provide a public service by illuminating the dark corners of WikiCorruption, and we frown on editors who try to supercede this mission with personal schticks and wakning. That said, the remedy is usually to move offending posts to the off-topic fora, not to ban the editor.

For more information on this topic, see our posting rules.

As far as a "notable editor" subforum for Jhochman is concerned, it has been a long time since we added one. As I recall, the criterion was five or more threads on the topic of the editor in question. It looks to me like Jehochman makes the cut. Are there any objections?

I did not say that the WR mods would ban for having a POV about the events of September 11, but would likely get tired even quicker of having every possible thread hijacked to express that view that which happened eventually at WP.

Different emphasis.

Don't forget, Georgewilliamherbert is qualified for HIS own subforum.....

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=16583
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=23478
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=20138
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=16866
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=8671
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=7084

Remember all those people who he blocked as "Wordbomb sockpuppets"?
I'd list all the associated threads, but there are too many.

GWH is a WikiPutz of some repute.

May I recommend a Cirt subforum?

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=21135&hl=Cirt

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=28265&hl=Cirt

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=27899&hl=Cirt

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=29740&hl=Cirt

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=30256&hl=Cirt

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=31400&hl=Cirt

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=30246&hl=Cirt

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=32726&hl=Cirt

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=31930&hl=Cirt

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=32848&hl=Cirt

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=33206&hl=Cirt

Eleven threads is a lot.

May I recommend a Cirt subforum?

Eleven threads is a lot.

Makes sense to me. I'll create the forum, but I am too busy just at the moment to move all the threads.

May I recommend a Cirt subforum?

Eleven threads is a lot.

Makes sense to me. I'll create the forum, but I am too busy just at the moment to move all the threads.

Another triumph for the Cirt fanboi mob.

Can we modify the subtitle for the FT2 forum? How about "Wikipedia's leading animal lover"?