The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Discussions in this subforum are hidden from search engines.

However, they are not hidden from automobile engines, including the newer, more "environmentally-friendly" electric and hybrid engines. Also, please note that this subforum is meant to be used for discussion of the actual biographical articles themselves; more generalized discussions of BLP policy should be posted in the General Discussion or Bureaucracy forums.

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Was this a BLP violation
mbz1
post Sun 9th October 2011, 11:57pm
Post #1


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 461
Joined: Tue 24th Aug 2010, 10:50pm
Member No.: 25,791



I wonder if this edit was a BLP violation. The user was blocked indefinetely over it.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Mon 10th October 2011, 12:58am
Post #2


blah
*********

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

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Gwen Gale never changes.....too stupid to realize the political statement of that picture (that the Duke lacrosse scandal article is utter defamatory crap), and too humorless to realize she's been trolled.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mbz1
post Mon 10th October 2011, 4:18am
Post #3


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 461
Joined: Tue 24th Aug 2010, 10:50pm
Member No.: 25,791



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Mon 10th October 2011, 12:58am) *

Gwen Gale never changes.....too stupid to realize the political statement of that picture (that the Duke lacrosse scandal article is utter defamatory crap), and too humorless to realize she's been trolled.


Actually Gwen Gale has changed quite a bit. The only thing that has not changed about her,
is her considering herself to be one the most important users, and behaving as such.

Here's Gwen Gale - a blocked user
QUOTE
There are too many of them for me here, too many role-playing troll admins, too many troll sockpuppet editors. Bye then. Gwen Gale 06:29, 1 April 2007 (UTC)


and here's Gwen Gale - a blocking admin
QUOTE
Owing to the above trolling, I have locked your talk page. [[User:Gwen Gale|Gwen Gale]] ([[User talk:Gwen Gale|talk]]) 12:05, 17 April 2010 (UTC)


or another example Here Gwen Gale, when she still was Wyss laugh.gif is talking about ArbCom
QUOTE
Anyway I disagree that I ever disrupted Wikipedia or ever had the personal potential or whim to do that. My contribution history speaks for itself. I've been slapped hard by arbcomm for expressing my opinion that among them lurk wankers, fiddlers, fools and trolls who coddle their own kind. [[User:Wyss|Wyss]] 07:54, 18 December 2005 (UTC)


And here Gwen Gale nominates herself for ArbCom hrmph.gif

Is she stupid and humorless? Maybe, maybe no, but she is a bully for sure, a power hungry bully, who never should have been an admin in the first place.
Back to the block of RCS. It is one bad block, removing the talk page access over this very innocent post is harassment and misusing of the tools. I challenge arbitrators, who read this post to revert the idiotic block made by a bully administrator.

This post has been edited by mbz1: Mon 10th October 2011, 5:38am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Tarc
post Wed 12th October 2011, 1:32am
Post #4


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,124
Joined: Fri 7th Mar 2008, 3:38am
Member No.: 5,309

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Ahh, now now mbz1 is going to troll WR with her list of grievances against all the wiki-admins who did her wrong?

Awesome, it's like watching Mr. Victim with a skirt.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Malik Shabazz
post Wed 12th October 2011, 5:40pm
Post #5


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue 24th Aug 2010, 5:17pm
From: God bless Chocolate City and its vanilla suburbs
Member No.: 25,765

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



For somebody who turned her back on Wikipedia, she sure seems obsessed with the site. laugh.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Tarc
post Wed 12th October 2011, 6:49pm
Post #6


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,124
Joined: Fri 7th Mar 2008, 3:38am
Member No.: 5,309

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Of course she is obsessed. The really sad thing is that even after all the AN/I drama over her block log was sorted out, she whined to rd232 to purge her block log anyways, and to re-open her talk page access, his last acts before voluntarily desysopping.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Wed 12th October 2011, 7:01pm
Post #7


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Tarc @ Tue 11th October 2011, 6:32pm) *

Ahh, now now mbz1 is going to troll WR with her list of grievances against all the wiki-admins who did her wrong?

Awesome, it's like watching Mr. Victim with a skirt.

I thought "Mr." Victim wore a skirt. blink.gif Certainly his panties were chronically twisted.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jd turk
post Thu 20th October 2011, 5:53am
Post #8


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon 5th May 2008, 12:56am
Member No.: 5,976



QUOTE(mbz1 @ Sun 9th October 2011, 11:18pm) *

Is she stupid and humorless? Maybe, maybe no, but she is a bully for sure, a power hungry bully, who never should have been an admin in the first place.
Back to the block of RCS. It is one bad block, removing the talk page access over this very innocent post is harassment and misusing of the tools. I challenge arbitrators, who read this post to revert the idiotic block made by a bully administrator.


You sure do spend a lot of time researching Wikipedia, Mbz1.

Since you seem to bring to our attention every block Gwen Gale has ever made that you find questionable, should we assume the other dozens of blocks were okey-dokey with you?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mbz1
post Thu 20th October 2011, 6:21am
Post #9


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 461
Joined: Tue 24th Aug 2010, 10:50pm
Member No.: 25,791



QUOTE(jd turk @ Thu 20th October 2011, 5:53am) *

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Sun 9th October 2011, 11:18pm) *

Is she stupid and humorless? Maybe, maybe no, but she is a bully for sure, a power hungry bully, who never should have been an admin in the first place.
Back to the block of RCS. It is one bad block, removing the talk page access over this very innocent post is harassment and misusing of the tools. I challenge arbitrators, who read this post to revert the idiotic block made by a bully administrator.


You sure do spend a lot of time researching Wikipedia, Mbz1.

Since you seem to bring to our attention every block Gwen Gale has ever made that you find questionable, should we assume the other dozens of blocks were okey-dokey with you?

"Dozens of blocks"? Would you please stop lying? Remember it is not wikipedia. Some of my blocks were OK, most were not, but I have never felt myself humiliated and bullied with any other block expect gwen gale's blocks. I am happy to discuss with you each and every my block, but I believe it should be done in a new thread. This thread posted a specific question, which so far was not answered.

BTW Are you gwen gale by any chance? looks like you're always defending her. And here is one of your first posts on WR
QUOTE
I'd love to be able to edit under my real name.
gwen gale also started editing under her real name as user Wyss.

Actually for some one who made 122 posts over 3+ years, you spent an amazing amount of time defending gwen gale.

This post has been edited by mbz1: Thu 20th October 2011, 5:15pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jd turk
post Thu 20th October 2011, 8:32pm
Post #10


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon 5th May 2008, 12:56am
Member No.: 5,976



QUOTE(mbz1 @ Thu 20th October 2011, 1:21am) *

"Dozens of blocks"? Would you please stop lying?


Not your blocks Mbz1, I'm talking about all of the other blocks and admin actions done by Gwen Gale (or any other admin you have a problem with). You've spent what looks like long hours putting together these cases, tracking down what you consider bad admin actions over the last year or so. Does that mean the other admin actions taken by her (and any other admin) are good ones in your eyes?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mbz1
post Thu 20th October 2011, 9:44pm
Post #11


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 461
Joined: Tue 24th Aug 2010, 10:50pm
Member No.: 25,791



QUOTE(jd turk @ Thu 20th October 2011, 8:32pm) *

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Thu 20th October 2011, 1:21am) *

"Dozens of blocks"? Would you please stop lying?


Not your blocks Mbz1, I'm talking about all of the other blocks and admin actions done by Gwen Gale (or any other admin you have a problem with). You've spent what looks like long hours putting together these cases, tracking down what you consider bad admin actions over the last year or so. Does that mean the other admin actions taken by her (and any other admin) are good ones in your eyes?

There are few bad blocks gwen made. There are many bad blocks all over wikipedia.
gwen gale probably deserves the award of the idiot-administrator for blocking an editor because he donated to wikipedia 1,000 dollars and told a story about his donation at jimbo's talk.
Besides gwen gale lied in her RFA, used sock accounts to violate her topic ban, wrote two articles about herself, deleted her own talk page history, responded to canvasing, blocked editors while involved. So she is a special case that probably deserves not just a thread but a whole topic on her own,but once again the topic of this thread is BLP, and I am really interested, if the edit in question could have considered a BLP violation that required an indefinite block with no warning.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jd turk
post Thu 20th October 2011, 9:51pm
Post #12


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon 5th May 2008, 12:56am
Member No.: 5,976



QUOTE(mbz1 @ Thu 20th October 2011, 4:44pm) *

gwen gale probably deserves the award of the idiot-administrator for blocking an editor because he donated to wikipedia 1,000 dollars and told a story about his donation at jimbo's talk...

...she is a special case that probably deserves not just a thread but a whole topic on her own.


Well, go ahead and start one then so we can centralize all the craziness to one thread.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th 9 17, 7:31pm