Wikitruth adds an article on SlimVirgin Options

[Daniel Brandt]

http://wikitruth.info/index.php?title=SlimVirgin

If Wikitruth was more on the ball, they would have done this a year ago. Then they might have been mentioned in the New York Times Magazine instead of Encyclopedia Dramatica.

[blissyu2]

Interesting.

I wonder why they took so long, given that she's so obvious.

Maybe they waited until wikiabuse wrote an article on her?

[BobbyBombastic]

pretty funny. still no MONGO article yet, and he went on a rampage once removing links to wikitruth after he deemed it an attack site.

[Somey]

She probably just did something that upset one of them. Maybe it's her new pastel pink-and-blue user page... that would be enough to get just about anyone completely incensed, I'd have to say!

They've got a new contributor too, one [[User:Leper_Messiah]], which suggests that they're interested in sucking things up into their minds, I suppose... I wonder if they'll break up the band, though? I mean, when the kids kill the man, whoever that happens to be this week.

Anyway, he wrote another new article over there, about orphaned images:

http://wikitruth.info/index.php?title=The_Orphanage

[LamontStormstar]

pretty funny. still no MONGO article yet, and he went on a rampage once removing links to wikitruth after he deemed it an attack site.

MONGO has done some stuff to harm wikipedia, but then he goes and helps them with national parks articles. In contrast, SlimVirgin has done all she can to harm wikipedia and nothing but harm is what she does.

This post has been edited by LamontStormstar: Fri 13th July 2007, 7:20pm

[gomi]

SlimVirgin has done all she can to harm wikipedia and nothing but harm is what she does.

I hope my anti-SlimVirgin credentials are unassailable when I say that, historically, Slim has done some reasonably creditable work on historical figures in Judaism and the Holocaust, notably Rudolph Vrba. Regrettably, much of this was some time ago, and she is mostly back to POV-pushing in animal-rights articles and general policy manipulation/abuse.

Yours in futherance of fair and balanced attack sites,
Gomi

[LamontStormstar]

SlimVirgin has done all she can to harm wikipedia and nothing but harm is what she does.

I hope my anti-SlimVirgin credentials are unassailable when I say that, historically, Slim has done some reasonably creditable work on historical figures in Judaism and the Holocaust, notably Rudolph Vrba. Regrettably, much of this was some time ago, and she is mostly back to POV-pushing in animal-rights articles and general policy manipulation/abuse.

Yours in futherance of fair and balanced attack sites,
Gomi

Slimey, Crum375, and Jayjg all are out to remove any mention of anyone being Jewish for God knows what reason.

[BobbyBombastic]

i'm not saying mongo is more deserving of an article, just odd that a fellow who kind of went apeshit against wikitruth doesn't have an article. maybe it's just too easy.

or maybe MONGO is the sacred cow. ED messed with MONGO and god damn it look what happened to them.

[blissyu2]

It took them long enough to have an article on SlimVirgin. By comparison, MONGO is relatively new.

[norsemoose]

It took them long enough to have an article on SlimVirgin. By comparison, MONGO is relatively new.

Also, by comparison, SlimVirgin is an incredibly successful manipulator. MONGO is just an ignorant ass, who has been given quite a few free passes since he is such a troll magnet. (Of course, he's a troll magnet because he can't resist setting out 12-course meals for them. People who find it necessary to "fight" trolls, or otherwise engage and/or antagonize them, tend to be prime troll fodder.)

[blissyu2]

But I guess that MONGO and SlimVirgin both have something in common. In most places, they'd both be banned for their behaviour. Yet they are admins. If they ever got de-sysopped, surely banishment would be close behind. Unless there's someone protecting them of course (which there is).

[Uly]

But I guess that MONGO and SlimVirgin both have something in common. In most places, they'd both be banned for their behaviour. Yet they are admins. If they ever got de-sysopped, surely banishment would be close behind. Unless there's someone protecting them of course (which there is).

MONGO already has been desysopped.

[norsemoose]

But I guess that MONGO and SlimVirgin both have something in common. In most places, they'd both be banned for their behaviour. Yet they are admins. If they ever got de-sysopped, surely banishment would be close behind. Unless there's someone protecting them of course (which there is).

MONGO already has been desysopped.

Yes, MONGO has been desysopped, although if I understand correctly, he is free to reapply for adminship, and his close buddies would be almost certain to vote for him. And to quickly label any opposers as "trolls" and even "sockpuppets of banned users".

MONGO does receive the support of the wikicult, despite his desysopped status. He evokes sympathy from other Wikipedians. I suppose he evokes sympathy from me as well; you kinda do have to feel sorry for someone that bloody stupid.

[KamrynMatika]

But I guess that MONGO and SlimVirgin both have something in common. In most places, they'd both be banned for their behaviour. Yet they are admins. If they ever got de-sysopped, surely banishment would be close behind. Unless there's someone protecting them of course (which there is).

MONGO already has been desysopped.

Yes, MONGO has been desysopped, although if I understand correctly, he is free to reapply for adminship, and his close buddies would be almost certain to vote for him. And to quickly label any opposers as "trolls" and even "sockpuppets of banned users".

MONGO does receive the support of the wikicult, despite his desysopped status. He evokes sympathy from other Wikipedians. I suppose he evokes sympathy from me as well; you kinda do have to feel sorry for someone that bloody stupid.

There's no way MONGO would ever pass an RfA. Did you see the page where he tried to run for Arbcom? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2006/Vote/MONGO)

He gained over 80 opposes in just under a day.

[Mndrew]

I felt it would be appropriate for me to sign up if only because of this thread...

On the fifth of June, I sent an email to the WikiTruth with my Gmail account telling them that I felt it was very odd they didn't have a SlimVirgin article. I wasn't expecting anything to come out of it, but lo and behold, I eventually got back an email stating that they were going to put up the article shortly.

Whether or not I was the only reason behind the inclusion of this article remains to be seen, but I certainly had a hand in it.

To the Wikitruth,

I must commend you all for compiling such a provocative, elaborative, and funny site that sheds light on the dark side of Wikipedia.

With that being said, however, I do find it rather odd that you don't have an article on SlimVirgin, who has come up in far too many Wikipedia Review.com threads in the Editors board and others, has perhaps the most interesting and convoluted stories of all the administrators of Wikipedia, and is a clear and obvious example of administrator abuse at the site - heck, she's practically the head of the cabal at that site.

I needn't be too exhaustive on her "accomplishments" there as I'm sure you all know them, but nevertheless I am sure you could easily write a revealing exposé of her without becoming AntiSocialMedia.net - and you would certainly get more readers than Judd's site.

Thanks for telling the Wikitruth and keep up the good work.

This post has been edited by Mndrew: Sun 15th July 2007, 9:18am

[guy]

Welcome and well done.

[blissyu2]

You're famous! Woo hoo! But will they give you credit? I don't see your name anywhere.

Of course, you do know that Wikipedia Review is basically responsible for Wikitruth, don't you? Through Andrew Orlowski at least. But Wikitruth don't say thanks for that either.

[JohnA]

You're famous! Woo hoo! But will they give you credit? I don't see your name anywhere.

Of course, you do know that Wikipedia Review is basically responsible for Wikitruth, don't you? Through Andrew Orlowski at least. But Wikitruth don't say thanks for that either.

Jeebus, practically everything on Web 2.0 is derivative. I begin to wonder if Web 2.0 isn't a sign of societal collapse.