The Founder as Editor Options

[timbo]

Let me make this clear from the top: I'm not a Jimmy Wales hater. He's actually a fairly effective high profile administrator and fundraiser. I think his personal politics are sketchy, but he came from the South and I'm enough of a Wikipedian to be able to Assume Good Faith. At least a little. That said, I've recently come across something that will bring such entertainment to The Haters that it seems criminal not to share it. Jimmy Wales, it seems, is a very poor Content Creator.

The Edit Count function shows a person spending more than half his edits on his own User Talk page, which is without precedent or equal, I presume: PIE CHART

Now look closely: That's 1,536 edits to mainspace, from the beginning of The Project to the moment I'm posting this piece of crap WR bit more than a decade later. Wrap your head around that. 1,500 edits is about a month and a half's worth of work for a dedicated Content Creator...

Now here's where it gets fun. Take a peek at the ARTICLES CREATED read-out...

Exactly 22 pieces created, since the time of the lowest low-hanging fruit in 2001 to this day. Isn't that a little mindblowing?

The one I like best is this: Jimmy Wales is the originator of the Wikipedia article on the M-16 rifle!

But wait, there's more. Here's the way he left it, back on my birthday in 2001: DA LINK

That would be speedy deleted out the door under some pretext or another today...

Obviously, standards have changed since then, but it is a bit of a comical thing, is it not?

Bottom line: Jimmy Wales may be the founder (and may or may not be a swell person), but him taking credit for Wikpedia is a little like a guy who used to use red spray paint on craft projects in his garage in Akron taking credit for the custom paintjob on a 2012 Porsche.


tim

This post has been edited by timbo:

[EricBarbour]

If you knew what Peter Damian discovered about Wales's arrogance, sexist piggery and skirt-chasing,
you'd conclude that his inability to write a useful article was a minor character flaw.

[Abd]

If you knew what Peter Damian discovered about Wales's arrogance, sexist piggery and skirt-chasing, you'd conclude that his inability to write a useful article was a minor character flaw.

The idea that to be a good editor, one must be a good content creator is a Wikipedia trope. They are actually two very different roles, and few people are good at both. Further, there is a lot of work where being a good editor and/or good writer are not connected well with the qualifications. Wales ended up in a certain place at a certain time, and became, then, the "God-King" of Wikipedia. That, as well, is not necessarily related to his qualifications. I think Wales is still stumbling around, clinging to a dream that somehow the community will grow up and function well. Probably not if he doesn't make it happen. He could, but, I'm afraid, he mostly doesn't know how to facilitate that.

Sometimes it seems that he listens, sometimes not. His "arrogance, sexist piggery and skirt-chasing," such as they might be, are not particularly out of the norm, they simply aren't exemplary (i.e., don't demonstrate exemplary behavior). (I'm not agreeing with "sexist piggery," that's beyond what I've seen, but he does make incautious statements, lots of people do, and I'm not interested in proof, here, please don't post this or that statement quoted from Wales to "prove" this claim.

Anyone who thinks they know something, and who acts on that or expresses it, can be accused of arrogance, it's a cheap shot. Skirt-chasing is, what? If he's been sexually abusive, harassing women, that would be a problem. However, what if the skirts chased him? And we don't really know details, and sometimes witnesses are not reliable, on matters like this. I'd say that Wales might be considered as having been vulnerable. Wales is a human male, and does what we might call stupid-male-stuff sometimes. As have I.

Would we expect something else?

[thekohser]

And we don't really know details...

Well, we do have calendars and knowledge of human gestation periods, so we know that Jimmy Wales fathered a child in the UK while still married to another woman in the state of Florida, which is a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable by a definite term of imprisonment not exceeding 60 days, plus a potential fine of $500.

[Abd]

And we don't really know details...

Well, we do have calendars and knowledge of human gestation periods, so we know that Jimmy Wales fathered a child in the UK while still married to another woman in the state of Florida, which is a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable by a definite term of imprisonment not exceeding 60 days, plus a potential fine of $500.

Gossip! Get a yellow hat, Greg, it would suit you.

I wonder if he's gotten any speeding tickets. Or smoked any dope. Anything else? I understand he had a pretty dirty sweater, or was that a T-shirt? Shocking. How could someone represent Wikipedia who has some dirty clothes, or dirty girlfriends, or whatever?

Look, if Wikipedia were functional, would we be at all interested in Wales' alleged peccadillos? What makes him a fair target? Yes, I know what does so *legally,* but I'm talking about a different kind of fairness.

Wales was not a brilliant organizer. He ended up in control -- or partial, very limited control -- of something he didn't understand. So?

He's not the problem. He could be part of the solution, or not. That remains his choice.