Professional journalist is an anonymous admin Options Rating

[Daniel Brandt]

I just put this on Katefan0's Talk page:

I request that you identify yourself on your user page as (name redacted), employed as a reporter by Congressional Quarterly and accredited through them by the Senate Press Gallery. I also request that you provide a current photo on your user page. I believe that your failure to identify yourself violates the spirit of journalistic ethics. Administrators should not be anonymous on Wikipedia in light of their power to shape content. --Daniel Brandt

Half an hour later: My comment is gone, no trace in history, page is protected. Golly, if I can't send her a message this way, should I send it to her editor at Congressional Quarterly? What do you think I should do?

[kotepho]

I don't know who said it, but no, they did not get a delevoper to remove the edit.

# 2006-05-25 23:27:21 Musical Linguist restored "User talk:Katefan0" (163 revisions restored)
# 2006-05-25 23:25:31 Musical Linguist deleted "User talk:Katefan0" (Personal information)
# 2006-05-25 20:36:09 Katefan0 protected User talk:Katefan0 (pi [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed])
# 2006-05-25 20:25:16 Katefan0 restored "User talk:Katefan0" (151 revisions restored)
# 2006-05-25 20:23:08 Katefan0 deleted "User talk:Katefan0" (pi)

They did the way any admin normally does it (without the page move). Developers can do it easier and actually remove the edits from the database, but this was not a case of that. Normally the developers are only called in for cases were someone in charge doesn't want even an admin to be able to see it, or if the page history is very, very long as it fucks up sometimes and it rapes the servers.

The only thing bad about Katefan0 is she always top posts on wikien-l, fucking annoying.