Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Jonny Cache

This is a thread for keeping track of the target articles in the ongoing Writers' Strike and Blank-In Protest. Think about what you need to document your claims. The example below gives an idea of how you might do that. It's a good idea to have a web-dated copy of your articles at another website or wiki before you join the strike.

Nota Bene (& His Cousin Vini, Too). We already have another thread for a general discussion of the strike, so in the interests of Solidarity let's try to save this one for JustZeFaxMaam.

Jon Awbrey

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey, the sole contributor of significant content to the following Wikipedia articles, grants any Wikipedia editor permission to remove their contents from Wikipedia and expresses his desire that these contents be so removed.

Signed,

Jon Awbrey

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ampheck&action=history
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boolean_domain&action=history
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boolean-valued_function&action=history
4. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comprehension_(logic)&action=history
5. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Continuous_predicate&action=history
6. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Descriptive_science&action=history
7. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grounded_relation&action=history
8. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hypostatic_abstraction&action=history
9. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hypostatic_object&action=history
10. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Inquiry&action=history
11. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Inverse_relation&action=history
12. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Logic_of_information&action=history
13. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Logic_of_relatives&action=history
14. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Logic_of_Relatives_(1870)&action=history
15. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Logic_of_Relatives_(1883)&action=history
16. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Logical_graph&action=history
17. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Logical_matrix&action=history
18. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Minimal_negation_operator&action=history
19. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Multigrade_operator&action=history
20. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Normative_science&action=history
21. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parametric_operator&action=history
22. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pragmatic_maxim&action=history
23. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prescisive_abstraction&action=history
24. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Relation_composition&action=history
25. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Relation_construction&action=history
26. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Relation_reduction&action=history
27. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Relative_term&action=history
28. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Semeiotic&action=history
29. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Semiotic_information_theory&action=history
30. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sign_relation&action=history
31. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sign_relational_complex&action=history
32. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sole_sufficient_operator&action=history
33. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tacit_extension&action=history
34. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Theory_of_relations&action=history
35. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Triadic_relation&action=history
36. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Types_of_relations&action=history
37. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zeroth-order_logic&action=history

Let me provide a couple of serving suggestions —

• You may wish to notify Wikipedia Personnel of this convenient Wikipedia Review Author Certification, Article Decertification (WR:ACAD) Page by inserting one of the following forms of comment in the edit line of the blanking or reverting edit:
  • «Article Withdrawn By Request Of Author (See "http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=14534&view=findpost&p=66085")».
  • «Removing Article Acquired Under False Pretenses By Wikipedia (See "http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=13980&view=findpost&p=60795")».
• The above articles have already been imported to Wikipedia Review — you may wish to consider doing that with yours.
• Be sure to wish http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG a Happy Thanx-But-No-Thanx-I'm-Taking-It-Back-You-Dumb-Turkey Day.

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Piperdown

hey hey jonny, you got to have the rosetta stone to translate slimese.......


Useful edits = 27 hour editing binges with a banhammer and wikimafia at your back in POV support of:

- your favourite political organization, like PETA. any article that mentions mammals needs useful edits.

- any old boss that fired you. if they had a BLP, yowsah! you are a pig in sh*t rollin' round!! now that is useful revenge.

- old schoolmates that made you cry by looking at you the wrong way. sweet, sweet useful revenge

- post menopausal socializing. editing in sexy icons to go with your sexy name is really useful in trying to get laid on the nets, and getting your way with the boy editors. Double Useful !!!

you got to learn how to be useful, jonny.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ars_Tottle
   ¤ (06 Oct 06 – 23 Dec 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ars_Tottle ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ars_Tottle ¤
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Autocratic_Uzbek
   ¤ (23 Dec 07 – 31 Dec 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Autocratic_Uzbek ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Autocratic_Uzbek ¤
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BABBUØ
   ¤ (25 Sep 07 – 10 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:BABBUØ ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/BABBUØ ¤
4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BABBU1
   ¤ (02 Oct 07 – 11 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:BABBU1 ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/BABBU1 ¤
5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Babe_Sanger
   ¤ (27 Dec 07 – 05 Jan 08) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Babe_Sanger ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Babe_Sanger ¤
6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bare_In_Mind
   ¤ (14 Oct 07 – 14 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bare_In_Mind ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Bare_In_Mind ¤
7. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Brigit_Zilwaukee
   ¤ (15 Sep 06 – 19 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Brigit_Zilwaukee ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Brigit_Zilwaukee ¤
8. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Buchanan's_Navy_Sec
   ¤ (10 Nov 07 – 19 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Buchanan's_Navy_Sec ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Buchanan's_Navy_Sec ¤
9. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Canvass_Back_Duck
   ¤ (03 Jan 08 – 04 Jan 08) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Canvass_Back_Duck ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Canvass_Back_Duck ¤
10. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chester_County_Dude
    ¤ (08 Jan 08 – 13 Jan 08) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chester_County_Dude ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Chester_County_Dude ¤
11. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DABBUØ
    ¤ (22 Sep 07 – 11 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DABBUØ&oldid=171185555 ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/DABBUØ ¤
12. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DABBU1
    ¤ (02 Oct 07 – 11 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DABBU1 ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/DABBU1 ¤
13. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Darkdealt
    ¤ (23 Dec 07 – 23 Dec 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Darkdealt ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Darkdealt ¤
14. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DEBBU
    ¤ (21 Sep 07 – 11 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DEBBU ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/DEBBU ¤
15. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DEBBUØ
    ¤ (30 Sep 07 – 11 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DEBBUØ ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/DEBBUØ ¤
16. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Delaware_Valley_Girl
    ¤ (08 Jan 08 – 13 Jan 08) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Delaware_Valley_Girl ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Delaware_Valley_Girl ¤
17. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Doubtentry
    ¤ (28 Sep 07 – 18 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Doubtentry ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Doubtentry ¤
18. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Education_Is_The_Basis_Of_Law_And_Order
    ¤ (01 Oct 07 – 13 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Education_Is_The_Basis_Of_Law_And_Order ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Education_Is_The_Basis_Of_Law_And_Order ¤
19. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fallopius_Manque
    ¤ (02 Nov 06 – 14 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fallopius_Manque ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Fallopius_Manque ¤
20. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Flower_Mound_Belle
    ¤ (27 Dec 07 – 05 Jan 08) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Flower_Mound_Belle ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Flower_Mound_Belle ¤
21. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Humain-comme
    ¤ (30 Oct 07 – 14 Dec 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Humain-comme ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Humain-comme ¤
22. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:IP_Phreely
    ¤ (02 Jan 08 – 02 Jan 08) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:IP_Phreely ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/IP_Phreely ¤
23. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JustZeFaxMaam
    ¤ (12 Dec 07 – 21 Dec 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JustZeFaxMaam ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/JustZeFaxMaam ¤
24. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kato9Tales
    ¤ (12 Dec 07 – 19 Dec 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kato9Tales ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kato9Tales ¤
25. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Marsboat
    ¤ (20 Nov 07 – 24 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Marsboat ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Marsboat ¤
26. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Masked_And_Anonymous
    ¤ (01 Jan 08 – 06 Jan 08) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Masked_And_Anonymous ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Masked_And_Anonymous ¤
27. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mr._Peabody's_Boy
    ¤ (12 Nov 07 – 15 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mr._Peabody's_Boy ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mr._Peabody's_Boy ¤
28. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mrs._Lovett's_Meat_Puppets
    ¤ (31 Dec 07 – 06 Jan 08) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mrs._Lovett's_Meat_Puppets ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mrs._Lovett's_Meat_Puppets ¤
29. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Navy_Pierre
    ¤ (30 Dec 07 – 07 Jan 08) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Navy_Pierre ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Navy_Pierre ¤
30. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Overstay
    ¤ (13 Nov 07 – 25 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Overstay ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Overstay ¤
31. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pluto_Car
    ¤ (07 Dec 07 – 12 Dec 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Pluto_Car ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Pluto_Car ¤
32. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Poke_Salat_Annie
    ¤ (26 Dec 07 – 04 Jan 08) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Poke_Salat_Annie ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Poke_Salat_Annie ¤
33. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Preveiling_Opinion_Of_Dominant_Opinion_Group
    ¤ (15 Oct 07 – 12 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Preveiling_Opinion_Of_Dominant_Opinion_Group ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Preveiling_Opinion_Of_Dominant_Opinion_Group ¤
34. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RABBU
    ¤ (19 Sep 07 – 10 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:RABBU ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/RABBU ¤
35. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RABBUØ
    ¤ (25 Sep 07 – 11 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:RABBUØ ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/RABBUØ ¤
36. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Random_Fits_O_Daffin
    ¤ (11 Dec 07 – 19 Dec 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Random_Fits_O_Daffin ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Random_Fits_O_Daffin ¤
37. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Real_World_Apple
    ¤ (05 Oct 06 – 30 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Real_World_Apple ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Real_World_Apple ¤
38. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:REBBU
    ¤ (20 Sep 07 – 11 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:REBBU ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/REBBU ¤
39. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:REBBUØ
    ¤ (28 Sep 07 – 11 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:REBBUØ ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/REBBUØ ¤
40. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Southeast_Penna_Poppa
    ¤ (08 Jan 08 – 13 Jan 08) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Southeast_Penna_Poppa ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Southeast_Penna_Poppa ¤
41. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Trainshift
    ¤ (27 Nov 07 – 21 Dec 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Trainshift ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Trainshift ¤
42. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Unco_Guid
    ¤ (21 Dec 07 – 31 Dec 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Unco_Guid ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Unco_Guid ¤
43. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Unknown_Justin
    ¤ (02 Jan 08 – 14 Jan 08) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Unknown_Justin ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Unknown_Justin ¤
44. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Viva_La_Information_Revolution%21
    ¤ (23 Dec 07 – 07 Jan 08) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Viva_La_Information_Revolution%21 ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Viva_La_Information_Revolution%21 ¤
45. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:VOCØ
    ¤ (17 Oct 07 – 15 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:VOCØ ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/VOCØ ¤
46. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:West_Goshen_Guy
    ¤ (08 Jan 08 – 13 Jan 08) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:West_Goshen_Guy ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/West_Goshen_Guy ¤
47. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Wolf_of_the_Steppes
    ¤ (28 Sep 07 – 19 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wolf_of_the_Steppes ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Wolf_of_the_Steppes ¤
48. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Would_Goods
    ¤ (07 Dec 07 – 19 Dec 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Would_Goods ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Would_Goods ¤
49. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Yolanda_Zilwaukee
    ¤ (15 Sep 06 – 20 Nov 07) ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Yolanda_Zilwaukee ¤ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Yolanda_Zilwaukee ¤

Salute!

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Jonny Cache

Strikers seeking justification for removing the above articles by Jon Awbrey from Wikipedia can do no better than the following De Facto Policy Of The Week and All Round Anonymously Authorized But Undoubtedly Learned Opinion from the Person Or Persons Unknown Operating Under The Aegis Of SlimVirgin (POPUOUTAO SlimVirgin).

When you remove the offending content, be sure to cite the relevant policy in the edit line, to wit:

UK dialecticians may of course use WPUK:IPSTAIORFWARSEMBHTF.

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: The Joy

But then http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_administrators move in...

Posted by: Jonny Cache

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ars_Tottle.

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Kyaa the Catlord

Coredesat says "All your pages are belong to us." and just protected your list.

Posted by: The Joy

Ah, Victorian hypocrisy! I remember studying that well in college! Perhaps a little too well...

I sometimes think we're dealing with robots here instead of mortal men. Just bland templates. No attempts at discussion.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

Robofops?

Jonny

Posted by: guy

So it's now impermissible to base anything on primary sources, however reliable?

Posted by: Moulton

Oh, now that's WP:RICH (Robot-Influenced Corrupt Handling).

But seriously, folks, this grinding up of Awbrey's contributions reminds me of the Nordic tale of the descent into the Maelström.

The word literally means Mill Storm, by allusion to the grinding action of a mill when the counter-rotating millstones get rotating too feverishly.

The result is a tornadic whirlpool, in which everything is ground to a pulp and sucked into the a black hole, whilst the flyaway flywheels fly off the handle and go careening about creation in a delightfully deadly disaster double-feature drama.

Posted by: dogbiscuit

That has been the fundamental debate for the last 6 months on WP:NOR: essentially moving policy from Wikipedia is not a primary source, to being Wikipedia cannot use primary sources. Slim snuck this principle in a while back and the cabal is now holding it in place arguing that it has been part of policy for a long time (fingers in ears; la, la, la; we're not listening to any arguments; fuck off, trolls).

Those who want common sense in policy note that if someone says something in a primary source (whatever that might be, there is not even agreement there), then for an editor to use it, it is not original. and therefore the whole source typing argument raging is an irrelevance.

My take is that SV wants to put journalism above other sources. This in part is based on the fallacy that newspaper writing is a process that is about ensuring accuracy, the assumption that editors in papers are the equivalent to the "many eyes" of Wikipedia. It is a common technique of hers to argue that content cannot be included because, and only because, it is from a primary source. The most insidious part of her argument is that she argues that the quality of the source alters depending on perspective - a high quality secondary source might become a primary source. For example, if there is an aircraft accident investigation, the report on the incident by the authorities are high quality resources, debated with care, presenting a rigorous case. However, if we start debating whether the investigation was sound, this report becomes inadmissible for Wikipedia as it is a primary source with respect to the investigation. She would argue that if a newspaper made comments on the report, then it could be used, but an editor, as a commentator, could not use the report at all, even to refute a misrepresentation by a newspaper as that use would be introducing original thought of the editor.

This is what SlimVirgin calls source-based research, where you Google around a bit, gather lots of newspaper clippingssecondary source material and assume that you therefore know your subject.

All editors of Wikipedia are expected to be able to demonstrate absolute ignorance of their chosen topic or else they clearly will be influenced by their own opinions.

The refutation of incorrect analysis by journalists becomes one of the most contentious issues with this sourcing view in NOR, in that you can have actual facts from impeccable sources to show that the Wikipedia article is misleading, but Wikilawyering will claim that you have to put distorted secondary sourced verification over truth.

Posted by: dtobias

You mean like the way juries are chosen in the American legal system?

Posted by: Yehudi

In the British legal system, solicitors and people who have been expert witnesses cannot serve on a jury because they might understand the system.

Posted by: dogbiscuit

Well, the analogy would be that, rather than the jury, it would be the barristers are not allowed to interview their clients in case they argue from fact rather than the evidence.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

SlimVirgin and her Wikiplatoon have been waging this war against real world norms of sourced research for almost 2 years now. The first shoves of her POV putsch are detectable in January of 2006, with another major conflagration coming in the summer of 2006.

I refer everyone once again to the Historical Datapoints For WP:NOR that I collected in the summer of 2006.

The problem is this.

SlimVirgin has her Very Own Original Doctrine Of Originality (VOODOO). That's nice for her — it fits hand-in-sock with her own peculiar Weltanshoving — but it's complete and utter Loony Toons from the standpoint of how the rest of the world has always done things.

SlimVirgin and her Cohores need this VOODOO very BAD.

The Caped And Booted Anonymous League (CABAL) of Kiddie Kartoon Karacters who run Wikipedia need it to auto-justify their costume-ærie shadow existence as Self-Appointed Invisible Judges of all the people they envy in the world, people who have real personalities, who can use their real names and real knowledge to stand behind what they say, people who have real habitations within real communities of inquiry. That is how BAD they need it. They will shove anyone and everyone out of Wikipedia who gets in the way of their casting this VOODOO over the whole project.

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: dogbiscuit

Jon, I know that there is a dreadful circularity to the debate on NOR, and appreciate your potted history - before my WR days I have seen several people attempt to recreate that history in the face of blanket denial. What was interesting was that at one point, with Slim on the back burner, it almost seemed like change was possible.

The most frustrating element is watching the massed ranks of good faith contributors being lined up to do righteous battle, not realising that they are about to be shot in the back by their own generals for the good of the countryproject.

It must be about time to circle the wagons around the synthesis example again - a fine example of such an obscurity that it makes no sense on its own, yet must be a good example "because it really happened" (a recent ruling is that any example in Wikipedia policy is only allowed if it is real, because a made up one would be contrived and therefore could not be useful). They don't see that synthesis is a trivial concept within OR and can be explained simply. If its explained simply, then people get all upset about it being simple, because it is an important, complex, complicated concept: we therefore invent a horrible convoluted example and nobody understands it without 20 pages of explanation, where it becomes apparent that the complexity is simply, erm, synthesised. So the useless section, which uses algebra rather than plain English to make its point remains as another monument to the perfection of Wikipedia and its cabal.

As a seasonal analogy, WP is rather like the Workhouse, with Oliver going to the Mr Jimbo for another bowl of WikiPolicy - "Please Sir, we want some more" while the admins trough around their sumptuous banquets of sekrit mailings and sneer at the ingrates who simply want fair treatment to survive. I guess that makes WR Fagin's lair?

Posted by: Jonny Cache

No time for full reply.

What people keep missing is that the policy once accorded with normal practice and that it was SlimVirgin and Crew who started changing it to fit the image of their personal philosophy. What I and others who got run off about the same time did was merely to try and prevent them from carrying out their malign mutations.

There are reasons why they want a second-rate standard of sourcing.

But that will have to wait till later …

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Jonny Cache

A fascinating book on this subject —

Giorgio de Santillana and Hertha von Dechend, Hamlet's Mill : An Essay on Myth and the Frame of Time, David R. Godine, Publisher, Boston, MA, 1977. 1st published 1969.

Jonny

Posted by: dogbiscuit

I presume you are seeing the lively debate on Jimbo's talk page. Good to see the usual suspects using the usual crummy arguments.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

Have only been able to sample it off and on.

As an observer more casual than causal, the deconstructive question of interest is this:

Why does the Person Or Persons Unknown (POPU) who write under the nom de φume of «SlimVirgin» need their Very Own Original Doctrine Of Originality (VOODOO) — e-carnating as it does the manifestly novel subdogma of Original Syn — as desperately as they do?

When it comes to spelling out the re*cursed characters of SlimVirgin's VOODOO, even the occasional sampler can hardly help but notice the self-contradictory mix of Infantile Infallibility and Adolescent Cartesian Doubt that marks the philosophical cocktail of the unexamined life — and though I wouldn't go so far as to call it not worth living, it is self-confessedly not worth wasting a real name and a local habitation thereon.

Airy nothing ∴ let it remain.

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Moulton

I'm afraid to say, there's a lot of custom-crafted rationalization going on there.

Whatever one fears at the moment, one can rationalize a policy against it.

There oughta be a policy against that.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

Which raises the question —

What does the Wikipediot fear most?

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Moulton

Falling into disrepute.

And if I'm wrong about that, then here I am falling into disrepute with respect to my own contemptible analysis.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

My guesses would be —

Fear Of Uncertainty (FOU — Xcuse My French)

Which rather paradoxically leads to —

Fear Of Knowledge (FOK — Xcuse My Angle-Sexon)

Except, of course, for SlimVirgin, who fears, above all, anyone Pickin' Cherries.

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Moulton

Given that WP is a social networking site with a vicious dominance hierarchy, I'd say the Humiliation-Pride Axis is more salient than the Anxiety-Confidence Axis.

Posted by: Eleland

Come on, what on earth is the point of this campaign? Could you guys be any more juvenile? I'm sure you know that you can't un-GFDL something once you've GDFL'd it, which makes your "widthrawn at request of author" shtick totally invalid. What is this supposed to accomplish?

Posted by: Somey

It may be "quixotic," but I wouldn't say it was "juvenile" - far from it. If you accept the premise that a free-distribution license shouldn't be used as a substitute for basic publishing ethics, then it becomes a simple question of whether or not the policy of maintaining original content on the web, against the author's wishes, is ethical or not.

I mean, I'm guessing you don't accept that premise, or you wouldn't say that the shtick is "totally invalid," right? To me, that's an absolutist view of the situation, which not only puts the license above all other considerations, it makes it the only consideration. That's one of the biggest problems with forced collaboration among highly diverse groups of individuals - everyone's ethical stance on a given issue is different, so in order for everyone to get along, people end up solving problems with rules-based legalistic procedures - and ethics are often thrown out the window as being too complicated and problematic to even consider.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

I think part of the BiP thinking, in addition to respect for ethical attribution, is an utter contempt for GFDL, which is a perfectly adequate license for a video game but a piss poor license for an encyclopedia. Wait a minute...that might explain a whole lot.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

If you are asking about the Blank-In Protest and/or Writers' Strike then I believe that sufficient rationale for those actions has already been provided on the pertinent threads — for anyone who exhibits the due respect of reading them — but please feel free to address specific points and ask specific questions, if you have any.

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Jonny Cache

Just for the record — broken as it may be, since I know I've said this better once or thrice before — I respect both the spirit and the letter of GFDL. But Wikipedia operates in flagrant default on both those scores, so I see no social contract in force there. Displaying the GFDL logo on Wikipedia pages is just one of Wikipedia Management's many false pretences under which it acquires the work of good faith contributors.

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Moulton

I agree that Wikipedia suffers from the lack of a functional social contract.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

For the sake of future discussion, perhaps at another location, we probably ought to distinguish between a Tacit Social Contract (TSC, TSC) and an Explicit Social Contract (ESC).

It needs to be recognis/zed that an ESC can function only within the context of a prior TSC, in particular, a TSC that dictates respect for the non-escape clauses of an ESC.

At its present stage of ethical and intellectual development, Wikipedium As A Hole (WAAH) has yet to reach the threshold of responsibilty that it takes to acknowledge any respectable TSC known to civil society, much less the ESC of any responsible knowledge-directed enterprise.

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Moulton

I sometimes wonder if I will live long enough to witness that future discussion.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

It would be the road less traveled for Wikipedia Reviewers to discuss social contracts. Even though the topic is relevant to the Future Of Open Source Information, there is no chance that Wikipediots will ever observe any order of operational social contract, whether tacit or explicit. It simply goes against the grain of their fundamentally irresponsible character.

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Moulton

Pity.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

No, Pitney.

It's a Wiki Without Pity.

Jonny

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

Bumping Up For Ease Of Reference On Another Thread

Jon

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

Well, I love playing with software widgets as much as the next geek, so I thought I might as well see how all my old articles — in such hot demand at Wikipedia, not to mention at a scraper warehouse near you — are faring under http://wiki-trust.cse.ucsc.edu/.

Give me a while to install new prefixes on the articles below.

Jon

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

So, generally speaking, the only time you see much Orange at all in any of the above 3 dozen articles is when it's a short article of one or two paragraphs and only a handful of subsequent edits, in other words, an article that remained essentially unchanged from the time that I created it in the waxing months of 2006.

Jon

Posted by: thekohser

I'm waiting for an equally useful tool to come out of Santa Cruz, such as a meter on every Wikipedia article that shows how long each page was viewed by the average unique visitor.

No, wait... that might actually be interesting.

Maybe a tool that shows, collectively, how many times unique visitors to pages have farted while viewing the page. Now THAT would be tip-top useful like this Orange-o-nater.

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

Buddha Bump!

Posted by: Somey

When Bertha Buddha did her thang... she started the Buddha Bump Boogieeeeeee!

No question!

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

Must Be The Season For Giving, Strike That, Taking It Back —

I started this Writers' Strike at a time when Chapman & Gerard & Company started up a barrage of lies on the Wikienlist about my Wikipedia work, months, maybe a year after I had left there.

Looks like Deja Vu all over again, so I guess it's time for a refresher course.

I heartily recommend that all you folks who are wasting your lives away working and bitching about working conditions on Wikipedia start doing something Real about it. GFDL the content you created over to Wikipedia Review or someplace like that, and Start Taking It Back From Those Ungrateful Sons Of A Bitch!!!

Jon Awbrey