Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

_ General Discussion _ Welcome to new members

Posted by: blissyu2

In light of http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20070802/comprehensive-coverage-of-the-slimvirgin-scandal/, and http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20070727/wikipedia-review-in-the-news/, a lot more people have been looking at Wikipedia Review posts, and we have had a number of new people sign up. To those people: welcome.

Signing up is risky, as Wikipedia currently lists Wikipedia Review as an attack site, hence if you join here, then they are well within their rights to ban you for joining here, and/or to use anything that you say on here against you on Wikipedia (including de-sysopping you, as they did for Guanaco, Karmafist and Everyking). Also note that Karmafist was banned because of a post that he made here as well. However, you can get around this by quite simply not revealing your Wikipedia username. This is up to you of course, and if you plan to make volatile attacks against Wikipedia Review, then its probably a good idea to use your Wikipedia username (Snowspinner never got in to any trouble for posting here, because he never said anything nice about Wikipedia Review). Of course, we won't be too impressed if your only reason to join here is to attack us, and we reserve the right to ban you if it gets out of hand. However, if you're already banned from Wikipedia, then you're free! Free to say what your username was, protest your ban, and so forth. The freedom of being banned!

So then why sign up? Over 75% of people who read this forum do not sign up. But one important reason to sign up is that then you can add your story to all of this. In relation to the current story, if you publish it on Wikipedia then it'll be deleted, if not perma-deleted (e.g. Kylu's posts) and in some cases they have even banned people for daring to post it (e.g. Hexrei). But here you can post freely and not worry about it being wiped.

Wikipedia has given Wikipedia Review a Parental Advisory Sticker, and we hope that you take that in the same way that you would if it was on a music compilation. It means that we are so good that Wikipedia has to censor us!

Posted by: Brutus

I'm happy to have signed up. I don't have much to contribute yet, but I have some interesting stories about my experiences on wikipedia which I hope to share, when I get the time.

Although I was warned by an well know administrator I would be permanently banned if I were to do so. rolleyes.gif

I must admit, some Admin's over there are great, but then there are some Admins and editors who think they own the internet.

It's those ones who bring the place down.

I used to think Wikipedia was the greatest thing online since sliced bread, - and it could be.

But lately I'm thinking it's an online encylopedia run by amateurs for amateurs.

I hope I don't sound too negative.



Posted by: Derktar

QUOTE(Brutus @ Tue 20th November 2007, 10:16pm) *

I'm happy to have signed up. I don't have much to contribute yet, but I have some interesting stories about my experiences on wikipedia which I hope to share, when I get the time.

Although I was warned by an well know administrator I would be permanently banned if I were to do so. :rolleyes:

I must admit, some Admin's over there are great, but then there are some Admins and editors who think they own the internet.

It's those ones who bring the place down.

I used to think Wikipedia was the greatest thing online since sliced bread, - and it could be.

But lately I'm thinking it's an online encylopedia run by amateurs for amateurs.

I hope I don't sound too negative.

Et tu Brutus?

Sorry bad pun, but now that it's behind us...

Your experiences are not unique unfortunately, fear is a powerful motivator and we're glad you have at least seen the light.

Welcome to the Review and enjoy your stay!

Posted by: guy

QUOTE(Brutus @ Wed 21st November 2007, 6:16am) *

I hope I don't sound too negative.

No, you certainly don't. Welcome.

Posted by: Why-o-y

Please help me. What the heck is going on on Wikipedia? I'm an emotional person, sure, but by-gone-it, I'm human and smart by the standards. I also have a few college degrees! Why do they have kids in charge of the community? Kids that have no life experience, nevermind edjumacation, and think they know-it=all! I know, most of us have been that age once. But, come-on, how can a 20-year-old make a good arbiter. Let alone and 13-year-old admin. Sure there are younin's (savants) that are "special" in that they are beyond their age. But, isn't that a minority?!!!?

Isn't it true that the average IQ is a double digit one? Doesn't that mean that most people are stupid?

My god, I think I've just experienced a segment in past history, like in the Nazi era. Someone please help me!

Please be gentle, because I'm emotional...but god-dammit. I can take it, I can say "Fuck" and "moron" without flinching. I can take constructive criticism from those I respect and know are much smarter than I. (Not too many, because my IQ is very high, but my EQ is low.)

I can take the vandals saying you're gay, and you're mother is fat, etc. But, I cannot take those who are in "power" ie. admins, clerks, whatever who are fucking insane.

Just a rant. Is there a rant forum? Will I be blocked for "cussing" here?

Your's truly,
Disillusioned emotional drama troll who cannot stand the hypocrisy and the Wiki-way!
Why-o-y

Posted by: guy

Welcome Why-o-y.

Wikipedia is run by youngsters because they are the people with the time and inclination to do the sort of things that help people become admins. And it becomes self-reinforcing; because that is the sort of person who runs things, similar people are welcomed and encouraged.

The average IQ is supposed to be 100 by definitio, though that was probably calibrated decades ago and maybe people have changed. Still, 50% of people must be below average.

Posted by: Why-o-y

It's also for those with little time left. Having a terminal illness is no fun, I'd rather go out with a bang. Even if it's only on Wikipedia. My situation does not allow me to go outside. I've had a good life though.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Why-o-y @ Mon 26th November 2007, 3:45am) *

Please help me. What the heck is going on on Wikipedia? I'm an emotional person, sure, but by-gone-it, I'm human and smart by the standards. I also have a few college degrees! Why do they have kids in charge of the community? Kids that have no life experience, nevermind edjumacation, and think they know-it=all! I know, most of us have been that age once. But, come-on, how can a 20-year-old make a good arbiter. Let alone and 13-year-old admin. Sure there are younin's (savants) that are "special" in that they are beyond their age. But, isn't that a minority?!!!?

Isn't it true that the average IQ is a double digit one? Doesn't that mean that most people are stupid?

My god, I think I've just experienced a segment in past history, like in the Nazi era. Someone please help me!

Please be gentle, because I'm emotional...but god-dammit. I can take it, I can say "Fuck" and "moron" without flinching. I can take constructive criticism from those I respect and know are much smarter than I. (Not too many, because my IQ is very high, but my EQ is low.)

I can take the vandals saying you're gay, and you're mother is fat, etc. But, I cannot take those who are in "power" ie. admins, clerks, whatever who are fucking insane.

Just a rant. Is there a rant forum? Will I be blocked for "cussing" here?

Your's truly,
Disillusioned emotional drama troll who cannot stand the hypocrisy and the Wiki-way!
Why-o-y


There is a distasteful indignity inflicted by 15 years olds with authority running roughshod over well educated adults. This has been noted here by others and is an active and fruitful aspect of criticism of Wikipedia. You certainly don't have to be a "troll" to chaff under those conditions. Welcome to WR Why-o-y.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(Why-o-y @ Mon 26th November 2007, 11:26am) *

It's also for those with little time left. Having a terminal illness is no fun, I'd rather go out with a bang. Even if it's only on Wikipedia. My situation does not allow me to go outside. I've had a good life though.


That's what it's all about, is it not? — sneaking a fragment of a semblance of what you wore out your life to learn past the dim hitcher on the road up ahead, the consolation prize, the vicarious immortality of leaving a legacy, the hope that it wouldn't be totally wasted if you could leave humanity one bit wiser for having been.

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Somey

QUOTE(Why-o-y @ Mon 26th November 2007, 2:45am) *
Why do they have kids in charge of the community? Kids that have no life experience, nevermind edjumacation, and think they know-it=all! I know, most of us have been that age once. But, come-on, how can a 20-year-old make a good arbiter. Let alone and 13-year-old admin.

Would that it were only the "kids" showing poor judgement and promoting themselves without the benefit of qualifications... If it were just them, they might eventually be able to get the situation relatively under control.

I also suspect there are internet forums devoted to discussing the ideal way to go out with a bang, but I couldn't personally recommend one...? smiling.gif

Posted by: Moulton

QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 26th November 2007, 11:27am) *
I also suspect there are internet forums devoted to discussing the ideal way to go out with a bang, but I couldn't personally recommend one...?

Writing a personal memoir on a blog is probably a good option.

Posted by: LessHorrid vanU

QUOTE(Why-o-y @ Mon 26th November 2007, 3:26pm) *

It's also for those with little time left. Having a terminal illness is no fun, I'd rather go out with a bang. Even if it's only on Wikipedia. My situation does not allow me to go outside. I've had a good life though.


Hmmmmm... I think I may well have interacted with you over at WP; and I may just be one of the "insane admins" you refer to - although I don't fit the rest of the criteria. smile.gif Whatever, welcome... If you are who I am thinking of, I think that that stuff should stay over there - here I'm just another poster. If you ain't, then - here I'm just another poster.

Cheers.

Posted by: mbilitatu

I tried to post to Wiki for about 10 months. I didn't contribute that much, because every time I did it was a fight. Someone with absolute ignorance about the topic but far more time and dedication to the fight made my efforts a phenomenal waste of time. It could take days to get a single sentence "approved", so any serious contribution seemed impossible.

What makes my situation more difficult is that I am a PhD research scientist who also has a decades long history of studying shamanism. I've worked around the world with some very powerful healers and have had jaw dropping, mind blowing experiences. And I have never had to let go of my scientific training during any shamanic work. In fact, my intellectual mindset has been a great ally in deepening the experience.

But ... as anyone who comes within a hundred miles of wiki knows ... any contribution to anything whose intellectual tradition is not grounded in the western scientific method is routinely pounded by the pseudo-skeptic mafia as fringe, pseudoscience, quackery and so on. And in the most frustrating of ironies, the pseudo-skeptic mafia uses false logic, bad science, political tactics and outright religious passion to do the pounding. In my opinion.

So ... I'm not totally certain why I'm here. Maybe to vent. Maybe to be heard. Maybe to see if there is a possibility to make a difference. Maybe to learn something. I was embroiled in one idiotic discussion and another request for deletion, and presumably those fights are still going on, but I don't have the desire to continue those fights and do not plan to bring them up here. I've researched the name involved and know that he's a famous, self-appointed guardian of the Wiki reality and he will undoubtedly outlast me. So be it.

Thank you for creating this venue. I have a couple ideas for discussions that might be interesting. We'll see.

Posted by: Anonymous editor

funny to read the first post in light of what we now know and in light of what has happened recently.

Posted by: tarantino

Welcome to the Review mbilitatu. Your experience at WP is not unusual.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(mbilitatu @ Tue 28th October 2008, 12:06pm) *

I tried to post to Wiki for about 10 months. I didn't contribute that much, because every time I did it was a fight. Someone with absolute ignorance about the topic but far more time and dedication to the fight made my efforts a phenomenal waste of time. It could take days to get a single sentence "approved", so any serious contribution seemed impossible.

What makes my situation more difficult is that I am a PhD research scientist who also has a decades long history of studying shamanism. I've worked around the world with some very powerful healers and have had jaw dropping, mind blowing experiences. And I have never had to let go of my scientific training during any shamanic work. In fact, my intellectual mindset has been a great ally in deepening the experience.

But ... as anyone who comes within a hundred miles of wiki knows ... any contribution to anything whose intellectual tradition is not grounded in the western scientific method is routinely pounded by the pseudo-skeptic mafia as fringe, pseudoscience, quackery and so on. And in the most frustrating of ironies, the pseudo-skeptic mafia uses false logic, bad science, political tactics and outright religious passion to do the pounding. In my opinion.

So ... I'm not totally certain why I'm here. Maybe to vent. Maybe to be heard. Maybe to see if there is a possibility to make a difference. Maybe to learn something. I was embroiled in one idiotic discussion and another request for deletion, and presumably those fights are still going on, but I don't have the desire to continue those fights and do not plan to bring them up here. I've researched the name involved and know that he's a famous, self-appointed guardian of the Wiki reality and he will undoubtedly outlast me. So be it.

Thank you for creating this venue. I have a couple ideas for discussions that might be interesting. We'll see.


Welcome mbilitatu. We have a resident shaman, who will be by soon to introduce himself. I think you will find significant support for your concerns about the use of harsh means to enforce the orthodoxy of entrenched and entitled editors.

Posted by: Peter Damian

QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Wed 1st August 2007, 4:28am) *

Signing up is risky, as Wikipedia currently lists Wikipedia Review as an attack site, hence if you join here, then they are well within their rights to ban you for joining here, and/or to use anything that you say on here against you on Wikipedia (including de-sysopping you, as they did for Guanaco, Karmafist and Everyking). Also note that Karmafist was banned because of a post that he made here as well.


Oi don't forget me mate personally banned by Jimbo for a mildly insulting comment against his minions made here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Peter_Damian

QUOTE(mbilitatu @ Tue 28th October 2008, 6:06pm) *

But ... as anyone who comes within a hundred miles of wiki knows ... any contribution to anything whose intellectual tradition is not grounded in the western scientific method is routinely pounded by the pseudo-skeptic mafia as fringe, pseudoscience, quackery and so on.


And rightly so in my view. In this house there are many mansions.

Posted by: AlioTheFool

Hello everyone.

Herschel was kind enough to register my account for me.

Posted by: Fritz

Just wanted to say hello somewhere without drawing attention to myself with a new topic.

I've been lurking around for a while, and am a little-known admin on Wikipedia, although I've been mentioned in a couple of threads here. Although I've not become known for my admin stuff, I inadvertantly seem to have started the Sarah Palin wheelwar, and caused a riot against bot-created articles. And those two items may have been embellished to make me seem more interesting.

I've lurked here for a while, reading a fair bit, and you've convinced me of some problems with Wikipedia beyond those I could identify myself. I'm not out to destroy Wikipedia, just like many of you, but I am interested in trying to explore how things could be changed. Alas, I lack the clout to inspire others, but hopefully every voice counts.


Posted by: Son of a Yeti

QUOTE(guy @ Mon 26th November 2007, 3:58am) *

The average IQ is supposed to be 100 by definitio, though that was probably calibrated decades ago and maybe people have changed. Still, 50% of people must be below average.

I'm surprised no one corrected yet this false statement. It would be true if it were the median, not the average.

As far as I know IQ 100 was supposed to be the average when it was invented. And it is not true that 50% people need to be below the average.

I'll give you an example.

Let's imagine a small community of Adam, Beth, Cecil, David and Sophia. Their IQs are:

Adam 70
Beth 75
Cecil 80
David 95
Sophia 180

The average is 100 (while the median is 80).

How many people are below the average? Four out of five or 80%.

It can be true about intelligence. But it is certainly true in many societies about wealth - when a small group of people has a lion share of property.

Posted by: Cedric

QUOTE(Fritz @ Wed 26th November 2008, 12:23pm) *

I've lurked here for a while, reading a fair bit, and you've convinced me of some problems with Wikipedia beyond those I could identify myself. I'm not out to destroy Wikipedia, just like many of you, but I am interested in trying to explore how things could be changed. Alas, I lack the clout to inspire others, but hopefully every voice counts.

Indeed, pretty much all of us here at WR do not favor taking action to destroy Wikipedia, not even those of us (like myself) who think that its destruction would be a good thing. As you read on, you should discover that the idea that we are plotting such action is just more BADSITES propaganda (as you already seem to be learning). WP is well along in the process of destroying itself. Affirmative action taken to "destroy" WP would find little if any favor here because 1) it's useless, 2) if discovered, it would be a needless distraction, and 3) anyhow, it could never measure up to the efforts of the cabalistas who are witlessly destroying WP from within.

When it comes to this, we here at WR prefer to just make popcorn. popcorn.gif

Posted by: AGK

Thanks for the welcome.

I created my account here some months ago mostly on a point of principle: I wished at that time to make a quiet stand against the view that Wikipedia Review is a dark netherworld to be repressed, dismissed, and ignored. That principle is one I continue to believe in: Wikipedia is badly in need of a forum for criticism. WR has the potential to be that forum, if only the poisoning by excessively extreme views can be worked around.

Following Fritzpoll's lead, above, I'll note that I'm a neutral lurker, and strive to maintain that image. I suspect I have a lot to say, however: I'm an ArbCom clerk, a MedCom member, and an enwiki administrator. Too many "influential" editors are unwilling to associate with WR, and I therefore also suspect that this may not be my last post. ;-)

We shall see.

Many thanks again for the welcome.

Posted by: Unrepentant Vandal

QUOTE(AGK @ Sat 29th November 2008, 6:40pm) *

Thanks for the welcome.

I created my account here some months ago mostly on a point of principle: I wished at that time to make a quiet stand against the view that Wikipedia Review is a dark netherworld to be repressed, dismissed, and ignored. That principle is one I continue to believe in: Wikipedia is badly in need of a forum for criticism. WR has the potential to be that forum, if only the poisoning by excessively extreme views can be worked around.

Following Fritzpoll's lead, above, I'll note that I'm a neutral lurker, and strive to maintain that image. I suspect I have a lot to say, however: I'm an ArbCom clerk, a MedCom member, and an enwiki administrator. Too many "influential" editors are unwilling to associate with WR, and I therefore also suspect that this may not be my last post. ;-)

We shall see.

Many thanks again for the welcome.


Welcome.

Anyone interested in Scottish trains can't be all bad smile.gif

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(AGK @ Sat 29th November 2008, 1:40pm) *

Thanks for the welcome.

I created my account here some months ago mostly on a point of principle: I wished at that time to make a quiet stand against the view that Wikipedia Review is a dark netherworld to be repressed, dismissed, and ignored. That principle is one I continue to believe in: Wikipedia is badly in need of a forum for criticism. WR has the potential to be that forum, if only the poisoning by excessively extreme views can be worked around.

Following Fritzpoll's lead, above, I'll note that I'm a neutral lurker, and strive to maintain that image. I suspect I have a lot to say, however: I'm an ArbCom clerk, a MedCom member, and an enwiki administrator. Too many "influential" editors are unwilling to associate with WR, and I therefore also suspect that this may not be my last post. ;-)

We shall see.

Many thanks again for the welcome.


Welcome to WR. I would suggest you take the time to carefully read and come to understand the positions of what you say are "extreme" posters. Many of us WR "hardliners" have views (responsibility/ accountability) that would be very mainstream outside of WP. The only people currently with nutter views are a few isolated outliers and some WP fanatic loyalists. You will also need to establish your ideas with the quality of your contributions here. Your stated "credentials" will not possess as much currency as you might hope.

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Sat 29th November 2008, 12:11pm) *

Many of us WR "hardliners" have views (responsibility/ accountability) that would be very mainstream outside of WP.

Exactly. That's a thought that is worthy of enough repetition that it ought to be part of our logo occassionally, or our guest sign-in package.

Welcome.

Posted by: AGK

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Sat 29th November 2008, 7:11pm) *

Welcome to WR. I would suggest you take the time to carefully read and come to understand the positions of what you say are "extreme" posters. Many of us WR "hardliners" have views (responsibility/ accountability) that would be very mainstream outside of WP. The only people currently with nutter views are a few isolated outliers and some WP fanatic loyalists. You will also need to establish your ideas with the quality of your contributions here. Your stated "credentials" will not possess as much currency as you might hope.


I make no attempt at using my "credentials" as bargaining chips for, well, for anything. I was expressing my surprise at the number of editors who do have those credentials and yet do not contribute or, indeed, seem to follow developments here. Call it "thinking aloud," I suppose.

I would agree with your colouring of the majority of WR's "extreme" views as rather ordinary outside of Wikipedia itself. When Wikipedia comes up in the course of everyday conversation (which it rarely does, admittedly), the overwhelming impression is that it is "unreliable" or "inaccurate." No opinion is ever expressed on the community—which, to the reader, is often invisible—but I would suspect many of them would share WR's view that it is a bureaucratic and unaccountable oligarchy. I disagree, of course, but, as a contributor to Wikipedia and a member of that oligarchy, I'm naturally biased.

I do maintain, however, that a proportion of opinions expressed here on WR are those of individuals disillusioned with Wikipedia as a result of personal experiences. (I think primarily here of banned editors with a qualm over Wikipedia administrator X, Y, or Z.)

Posted by: gomi

QUOTE(AGK @ Sat 29th November 2008, 11:53am) *
I do maintain, however, that a proportion of opinions expressed here on WR are those of individuals disillusioned with Wikipedia as a result of personal experiences. (I think primarily here of banned editors with a qualm over Wikipedia administrator X, Y, or Z.)

While many come here as a result of being banned -- often for no good reason, as Wikipedia bans people at more-or-less the drop of a hat -- but also arrive with or quickly adopt a more generalized mistrust of Wikipedia.

Some Reviewers are disillusioned at the community, and some are disillusioned over the lost opportunity of a real online encyclopedia, but either way, being banned hardly ever results in simply "a qualm" over a particular admin. While the blood sport of pointing out the worst abuses of the many abusive admins is good fun and diverting, the real criticism of Wikipedia here for the last year or more concerns its ultimate failure as both a community and an encyclopedia, not the small-minded antics of the individuals guards in the asylum.

Posted by: Luís Henrique

Hello... newbie here. What the initiation rites are?

I have found this message board by searching for online criticism of Wikipedia, after some weird experiences there. I am particularly interested in discussing the use of non-English sources in articles about history and society of foreign countries - especially Brazil -, and the existence of little cabals controlling those articles.

I'm Brazilian, 51, civil servant, have a History degree (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul), leftist political activist (Marxist, Workers Party), live in Brasília, have lived in Porto Alegre and Rio de Janeiro. My main general interests are, in no particular order, military history, Marxist theory, technologic history, linguistics, fictional literature.

Luís Henrique

Posted by: UseOnceAndDestroy

QUOTE(Luís Henrique @ Tue 3rd March 2009, 1:21pm) *

Hello... newbie here.

Welcome, Luís.

QUOTE
What the initiation rites are?

I think you just completed them.

QUOTE

I have found this message board by searching for online criticism of Wikipedia, after some weird experiences there. I am particularly interested in discussing the use of non-English sources in articles about history and society of foreign countries - especially Brazil -, and the existence of little cabals controlling those articles.

Recommend you look at a few of the current and older threads, and contribute from your own experience. Problems arising where WP editors lack knowledge/sense about other countries crop up sometimes - see for example http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=17731, and a personal favourite of mine, http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=15472


Posted by: Moulton

QUOTE(Luís Henrique @ Tue 3rd March 2009, 8:21am) *
What the initiation rites are?

1. Sign the Disloyalty Oath.

2. Swear off Kool Aid.

3. Enter a Twelve Step Program to learn how to solve Greek Letter Rebus Puzzles.

Posted by: Son of a Yeti

QUOTE(Luís Henrique @ Tue 3rd March 2009, 6:21am) *

Hello... newbie here. What the initiation rites are?


Dunno. Denounce at least three WP admins and one Arbcom member?

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(Luís Henrique @ Tue 3rd March 2009, 8:21am) *

Hello … newbie here. What the initiation rites are?

I have found this message board by searching for online criticism of Wikipedia, after some weird experiences there. I am particularly interested in discussing the use of non-English sources in articles about history and society of foreign countries — especially Brazil —, and the existence of little cabals controlling those articles.

I'm Brazilian, 51, civil servant, have a History degree (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul), leftist political activist (Marxist, Workers Party), live in Brasília, have lived in Porto Alegre and Rio de Janeiro. My main general interests are, in no particular order, military history, Marxist theory, technologic history, linguistics, fictional literature.

Luís Henrique


I had some rather bizarre experiences myself on the http://pt.wikipedia.org/, as http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Especial:Contribui%C3%A7%C3%B5es/JonAwbrey, after I discovered that some people had translated a few of my English Wikipedia articles there, and I went to help update them.

I never got clear on how many Portuguese Wikipedias there were, but they seemed to spend a lot of time fighting over dialect issues, even worse than UK vs. US idiots, er, idioms.

Could you shed some light on that?

Mods, please feel free split stuff off that doesn't belong on FAQ.

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(Luís Henrique @ Tue 3rd March 2009, 6:21am) *

Hello... newbie here. What the initiation rites are?

Image

Next, post something like:
Image
That jerks chains a lot. But I see you already did that. Argentinian White Race connection very clever. Boys from Brazil next? It's all in the nuance. tongue.gif


Posted by: Luís Henrique

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Tue 3rd March 2009, 4:23pm) *

QUOTE(Luís Henrique @ Tue 3rd March 2009, 6:21am) *

Hello... newbie here. What the initiation rites are?

Image

Next, post something like:
Image
That jerks chains a lot. But I see you already did that. Argentinian White Race connection very clever. Boys from Brazil next? It's all in the nuance. tongue.gif


Do you have a source that these people are Aryan?

Some of them look Bantu-Uralian to me.

Luís Henrique

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(Luís Henrique @ Tue 3rd March 2009, 2:35pm) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Tue 3rd March 2009, 4:23pm) *

QUOTE(Luís Henrique @ Tue 3rd March 2009, 6:21am) *

Hello... newbie here. What the initiation rites are?

Image

Next, post something like:
Image
That jerks chains a lot. But I see you already did that. Argentinian White Race connection very clever. Boys from Brazil next? It's all in the nuance. tongue.gif


Do you have a source that these people are Aryan?

Some of them look Bantu-Uralian to me.

Luís Henrique

It's not a well-defined term. Labeling people with non-well defined terms leads to unnecessary arguments.

Hell, labeling ANYTHING with non-well-defined terms leads to arguments.

Posted by: Luís Henrique

QUOTE
It's not a well-defined term. Labeling people with non-well defined terms leads to unnecessary arguments.


And, arguably, to World Wars.

QUOTE
Hell, labeling ANYTHING with non-well-defined terms leads to arguments.


Is "non-well-defined" a well defined term?

Luís Henrique

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(Luís Henrique @ Tue 3rd March 2009, 2:47pm) *

QUOTE
It's not a well-defined term. Labeling people with non-well defined terms leads to unnecessary arguments.


And, arguably, to World Wars.

QUOTE
Hell, labeling ANYTHING with non-well-defined terms leads to arguments.


Is "non-well-defined" a well defined term?

Luís Henrique

No it isn't. Would you like to have an argument?

Posted by: Luís Henrique

QUOTE
No it isn't. Would you like to have an argument?


It would prove your point, wouldn't it? wink.gif

Luís Henrique

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(Luís Henrique @ Tue 3rd March 2009, 6:36pm) *

QUOTE
No it isn't. Would you like to have an argument?


It would prove your point, wouldn't it? wink.gif

Luís Henrique

No, it wouldn't!

Posted by: Luís Henrique

QUOTE
No, it wouldn't!


But if I nuked you, it would make my point...

Luís Henrique

Posted by: LamontStormstar

QUOTE(mbilitatu @ Tue 28th October 2008, 12:06pm) *

I tried to post to Wiki for about 10 months. I didn't contribute that much, because every time I did it was a fight. Someone with absolute ignorance about the topic but far more time and dedication to the fight made my efforts a phenomenal waste of time. It could take days to get a single sentence "approved", so any serious contribution seemed impossible.

What makes my situation more difficult is that I am a PhD research scientist who also has a decades long history of studying shamanism. I've worked around the world with some very powerful healers and have had jaw dropping, mind blowing experiences. And I have never had to let go of my scientific training during any shamanic work. In fact, my intellectual mindset has been a great ally in deepening the experience.

But ... as anyone who comes within a hundred miles of wiki knows ... any contribution to anything whose intellectual tradition is not grounded in the western scientific method is routinely pounded by the pseudo-skeptic mafia as fringe, pseudoscience, quackery and so on. And in the most frustrating of ironies, the pseudo-skeptic mafia uses false logic, bad science, political tactics and outright religious passion to do the pounding. In my opinion.

So ... I'm not totally certain why I'm here. Maybe to vent. Maybe to be heard. Maybe to see if there is a possibility to make a difference. Maybe to learn something. I was embroiled in one idiotic discussion and another request for deletion, and presumably those fights are still going on, but I don't have the desire to continue those fights and do not plan to bring them up here. I've researched the name involved and know that he's a famous, self-appointed guardian of the Wiki reality and he will undoubtedly outlast me. So be it.

Thank you for creating this venue. I have a couple ideas for discussions that might be interesting. We'll see.





That's my experience, too. I'm of the opinion that these people do it just to harass others and most people on that site are like that, they just visit it to game the system not to help the site but to harass others. I recently read a thread on this forum about a guy called Chris-chan and the average Wikipedian makes Chris-chan look like one of the coolest people in the world by comparison.



Posted by: Jon Awbrey

Moderators,

I think it's time to rewrite a Welcome to New Members — this one seems calculated to be about as inviting as a stale wiki-φart hanging round the room — unpin this mess and depose all or most of it to the Lounge or Tarpit.

Thanx,

Jon

Posted by: Son of a Yeti

QUOTE(mbilitatu @ Tue 28th October 2008, 11:06am) *

I tried to post to Wiki for about 10 months. I didn't contribute that much, because every time I did it was a fight. Someone with absolute ignorance about the topic but far more time and dedication to the fight made my efforts a phenomenal waste of time. It could take days to get a single sentence "approved", so any serious contribution seemed impossible.

What makes my situation more difficult is that I am a PhD research scientist who also has a decades long history of studying shamanism.


Do you really think you know more about shamanism than the practicing shamans? WP is full of them. They are called "admins" over there.

evilgrin.gif

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(Son of a Yeti @ Wed 4th March 2009, 1:50pm) *

QUOTE(mbilitatu @ Tue 28th October 2008, 11:06am) *

I tried to post to Wiki for about 10 months. I didn't contribute that much, because every time I did it was a fight. Someone with absolute ignorance about the topic but far more time and dedication to the fight made my efforts a phenomenal waste of time. It could take days to get a single sentence "approved", so any serious contribution seemed impossible.

What makes my situation more difficult is that I am a PhD research scientist who also has a decades long history of studying shamanism.


Do you really think you know more about shamanism than the practicing shamans? WP is full of them. They are called "admins" over there.

evilgrin.gif

Perhaps you are confusing shamanism with shamism? Though I admit that Jimbo's suggestion to Rachel Marsden that he could interceed with the proper people to fix up her BLP, before banging her, was sort of a cross between both. yecch.gif

Posted by: Neo

QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Wed 1st August 2007, 12:28am) *

In light of http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20070802/comprehensive-coverage-of-the-slimvirgin-scandal/, and http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20070727/wikipedia-review-in-the-news/, a lot more people have been looking at Wikipedia Review posts, and we have had a number of new people sign up. To those people: welcome.

Signing up is risky, as Wikipedia currently lists Wikipedia Review as an attack site, hence if you join here, then they are well within their rights to ban you for joining here, and/or to use anything that you say on here against you on Wikipedia (including de-sysopping you, as they did for Guanaco, Karmafist and Everyking). Also note that Karmafist was banned because of a post that he made here as well. However, you can get around this by quite simply not revealing your Wikipedia username. This is up to you of course, and if you plan to make volatile attacks against Wikipedia Review, then its probably a good idea to use your Wikipedia username (Snowspinner never got in to any trouble for posting here, because he never said anything nice about Wikipedia Review). Of course, we won't be too impressed if your only reason to join here is to attack us, and we reserve the right to ban you if it gets out of hand. However, if you're already banned from Wikipedia, then you're free! Free to say what your username was, protest your ban, and so forth. The freedom of being banned!

So then why sign up? Over 75% of people who read this forum do not sign up. But one important reason to sign up is that then you can add your story to all of this. In relation to the current story, if you publish it on Wikipedia then it'll be deleted, if not perma-deleted (e.g. Kylu's posts) and in some cases they have even banned people for daring to post it (e.g. Hexrei). But here you can post freely and not worry about it being wiped.

Wikipedia has given Wikipedia Review a Parental Advisory Sticker, and we hope that you take that in the same way that you would if it was on a music compilation. It means that we are so good that Wikipedia has to censor us!


I'm happy to have signed up too. from my experience on Wikipedia, it appears that they take themselves MUCH to seriously and have lots to learn about the word "community" which, considering the lack thereof on Wikipedia is a joke ~ even today.

The common experience most Wikipedia users have had is that the system there seems to collapse on itself every couple of months. Moreover, Wikipedia hates experts in ANY field, which is usually seen Wiki admins pretending to be able to "overule" something based on a person's "virtual behavior" while at the same time ignoring all the rude activity over there.

Wikipedia is already known for not being a site one can trust for good information. Most people I know who've used Wikipedia and had the experience of trial and error via the poison penners on that site admit to not using or trusting the information based on the fact that Wikipedia does not monitior it's own sight very well (but loves to monitor sites that are critical of Wikipedia) such as some of the admins who read this site daily, and come to complain about Wikipedia here out of fear of being banned from the "Wikipedia community" (if there is such a thing) forever.

What Jimbo Wales misses is a touch of the real world. What Wikipedia has become is an "exclusive" virtual world of its own where haters, poison-penners, and all manner of "expert-haters" in all fields can attack others whom they personally disagree with (without having to personally face those they disagree with.)

Banning, and playing all sorts of "head games" by Wikipedia admins really has the effect of driving down the reliability of Wikipedia. Jimbo should have anticipated this, and corrected it at least three years ago, when all the witch-hunts of hearings were peaking in the years 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008.

Many users who were positive members of Wikipedia got turned off from the site, and this is now in the thousands. You see, what happens is that when you have a group of editors/administrators who are not screened well, they begin to sit on their own fiefdoms, and create cliques, which is what has happened with Wikipedia over the years.

Naturally, a site like this rises, and of course, there are those who continue to use Wikipedia, but who are free to express the problems over there without fear of being shouted down and thrown out of the "community" ~ which isn't a community in reality, but a collection of many (not all, but lots) of Wiki users/editors/admins who just are anti-social when it comes to "community."

One can easily disagree without being disagreeable, but Jimbo Wales hasn't seen that many of th people he has "hired" to manage Wikipedia, most likely are not very good at communcating with others, and have very low tolerance values to be able to actually discern what an issue is without making it so convoluted, to the point of attacking the honest user for doing the very thing that Wikipedia's own guildlines state should be done.

Wikipedia's own admins don't follow their own rules ~ especially being kind to newcomers. They also do not tutor well at all. There is the introductory "hello" ~ and then that's that. You are on your own, and often, this means that the user is open to the poison penners, sharks, and all those who continue to edit pages on Wikipedia as if they actually "own" the very knowledge they edit.

One can certainly have the right to one's own opinions ~ but not to one's own facts. And that is what Wikipedia doesn't get.



Posted by: JimmyWales.Org

Hi all. Some interesting comments. I myself joined wikipedia many years ago with no idea what it was. I surfed in and scanned the first few pages of rules(they are longer than encyclopedia brittanica) to get a gist of what was going on.

It said feel free to dive in and don't worry about making mistakes. So I did.

This included adding a few links to the external link sections or indeed creating such a section. Now I don't know who gets to decide which links are relevant and which aren't but I was soon banned and called a vandal.

I worked in the security industry for over a decade. Often chasing down real vandals. You know, kids who like to smash public toilets and spray paint graffiti on trains. Calling me a Vandal is a great way to get a black eye. Unfortunately the cowards over at Wikipedia turned down my offers of a personal one on one meeting to settle matters.

Its so easy to insult people online isn't it.

So I decided if I was going to be called a Vandal then I'd better be the best Vandal possible to earn the title. I hate wikipedia and vandalise it every opportunity I get now. Wikipedian administrators are lying scum. Despite the fact that most people here don't want to see wikipedia destroyed I'm of a different mind on the matter. But I think it will self destruct at some point. Possibly after somebody sues it.

My user name was Universe_Daily. Tried to correct a number of lies about me on that user page but every time I do I'm just banned again.

Thankyou for creating a wonderful source of interesting news concerning Jimmy Wales and Wikipedia. Thank you also for allowing me to join your discussions.

Posted by: Daxx

Hello all,

I've had experience of Wikipedia on-and-off for years; I started editing mostly as an IP editor but stopped after a while because despite making more of an effort to work within the policies than many editors, and trying to be civil and reasonable, the rudeness I was treated with as an IP editor simply made me uncomfortable and unwilling to edit. I've never been much for participating in the MMORPGism inherent to a lot of editing over there, but unfortunately got hooked on the Wikipedia Soap Opera before I knew what happened.

I've been reading WR for quite some time now but I decided to join mostly so I can go "behind the scenes" as it were with the non-public fora; and who knows - maybe I'll have something to contribute as well. I can't promise insightful commentary, since I'm more of a voyeur than a gadfly, but I'll try if the situation takes me. smile.gif

-Daxx

Posted by: Somey

QUOTE(Daxx @ Fri 10th July 2009, 1:24pm) *
I've been reading WR for quite some time now but I decided to join mostly so I can go "behind the scenes" as it were with the non-public fora; and who knows - maybe I'll have something to contribute as well. I can't promise insightful commentary, since I'm more of a voyeur than a gadfly, but I'll try if the situation takes me. smile.gif

Welcome to WR, Mr. Daxx... I guess this might be as good a time as any to apologize to all new members for our decision to hide the non-public forums from them until they make at least 5 posts.

Sorry about that!

Posted by: Daxx

QUOTE(Somey @ Fri 10th July 2009, 7:29pm) *

QUOTE(Daxx @ Fri 10th July 2009, 1:24pm) *
I've been reading WR for quite some time now but I decided to join mostly so I can go "behind the scenes" as it were with the non-public fora; and who knows - maybe I'll have something to contribute as well. I can't promise insightful commentary, since I'm more of a voyeur than a gadfly, but I'll try if the situation takes me. smile.gif

Welcome to WR, Mr. Daxx... I guess this might be as good a time as any to apologize to all new members for our decision to hide the non-public forums from them until they make at least 5 posts.

Sorry about that!


No problem at all; I think it's a reasonable decision. Frankly there's a lot to wikipolitics which is just downright malicious and doesn't need to be made available for public consumption, and five posts isn't too onerous.

Thanks for the welcome.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(Daxx @ Fri 10th July 2009, 2:32pm) *

QUOTE(Somey @ Fri 10th July 2009, 7:29pm) *

QUOTE(Daxx @ Fri 10th July 2009, 1:24pm) *
I've been reading WR for quite some time now but I decided to join mostly so I can go "behind the scenes" as it were with the non-public fora; and who knows - maybe I'll have something to contribute as well. I can't promise insightful commentary, since I'm more of a voyeur than a gadfly, but I'll try if the situation takes me. smile.gif

Welcome to WR, Mr. Daxx... I guess this might be as good a time as any to apologize to all new members for our decision to hide the non-public forums from them until they make at least 5 posts.

Sorry about that!


No problem at all; I think it's a reasonable decision. Frankly there's a lot to wikipolitics which is just downright malicious and doesn't need to be made available for public consumption, and five posts isn't too onerous.

Thanks for the welcome.


Daxx, I think that http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teNxRNKLWUs will help you understand what to expect from WR and how to participate in our discussions. wink.gif

Posted by: TheySeeMeTrollin

QUOTE(Brutus @ Wed 21st November 2007, 1:16am) *

But lately I'm thinking it's an online encylopedia run by amateurs for amateurs.


That last line said it all for me.

Posted by: Tower

I'm a newcomer too, just an observer of wikipedia's politics.

Posted by: Appleby

Hi I thought I'd try to inject some comments from a semi-detached angle. smile.gif

Posted by: Jim

Hello

Just posting a reply to confirm that I can (just signed up)

Sorry if it's the wrong place.

Jim

Posted by: Tintomara

Hi all!

Hmm...is there some sort of autoconfirmed mechanism that I'm missing here? Seeing as how I'm not allowed to view my own profile or anything...

Posted by: gomi

QUOTE(Tintomara @ Thu 1st October 2009, 12:12pm) *

Hi all!

Hmm...is there some sort of autoconfirmed mechanism that I'm missing here? Seeing as how I'm not allowed to view my own profile or anything...

Sort of. Post a few times, making salient, insightful points, and I'm sure things will sort themselves out. In any case, welcome!


Posted by: Appleby

QUOTE(Tintomara @ Thu 1st October 2009, 8:12pm) *

Hi all!

Hmm...is there some sort of autoconfirmed mechanism that I'm missing here? Seeing as how I'm not allowed to view my own profile or anything...

Yes, I had the same problem but it magically cleared up after a few posts. smile.gif

Posted by: Tintomara

QUOTE(gomi @ Thu 1st October 2009, 8:32pm) *

QUOTE(Tintomara @ Thu 1st October 2009, 12:12pm) *

Hi all!

Hmm...is there some sort of autoconfirmed mechanism that I'm missing here? Seeing as how I'm not allowed to view my own profile or anything...

Sort of. Post a few times, making salient, insightful points, and I'm sure things will sort themselves out. In any case, welcome!


Okay, thanks. The Random article button seems to be is missing though...

Posted by: Nine

Hello everyone. Been on and off WP for ages really. I keep kidding myself that it's just me being precious about endless bitching and all the politics.

But it's not, is it? biggrin.gif

Stay safe wherever you are.

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(Nine @ Thu 12th November 2009, 3:09pm) *

Hello everyone. Been on and off WP for ages really. I keep kidding myself that it's just me being precious about endless bitching and all the politics.

But it's not, is it? biggrin.gif

Stay safe wherever you are.


Greetings, Old Niner oldtimer.gif

There must be a 7 of 9 joke in here somewhere, but I'm late for a very important date, so I'll just throw it out to the group.

Jon Image

Posted by: Nine

QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Thu 12th November 2009, 8:18pm) *

QUOTE(Nine @ Thu 12th November 2009, 3:09pm) *

Hello everyone. Been on and off WP for ages really. I keep kidding myself that it's just me being precious about endless bitching and all the politics.

But it's not, is it? biggrin.gif

Stay safe wherever you are.


Greetings, Old Niner oldtimer.gif

There must be a 7 of 9 joke in here somewhere, but I'm late for a very important date, so I'll just throw it out to the group.

Jon Image


There aren't many of us 'single number' editors left; just me, 2 and 7 I think.

Thanks for the welcome Jon - enjoy 'the important date'!

Posted by: Julie

I wanted to take a moment to introduce myself and in an exercise of full disclosure explain my rationale for joining this community. First of all, my name is Julie and I am studying the psychology of subcultures. What does that mean exactly? I study subcultures that exist within imagined communities found on the internet.

I have no association with Wikipedia or the foundation except that I find the WP subculture to be incredibly fascinating and I think that it can be a valuable tool to helping me better understand the dynamics of imagined communities.

One of the hardest things about observing subcultures is that I have to find a way to distinguish the signal from the noise and that’s very hard to do that when most of the noise is disguised as signal. The most effective, but also most difficult way to develop an ethnography is through a combination of observations and self-reporting techniques. The Wikipedia subculture is far too cloistered and insular to be able to accurately observe them and I think that we can pretty much all agree that most self-reporting exercises will be incredibly slanted. I have been reading the forums on Wikipedia Review for about three weeks and finally decided that the only way for me to get an honest view of the Wikipedia subculture is from people who have no vested interest in maintaining a public perception. In other words, I am going to another tribe to learn more about the tribe I really want to study.

Cultural anthropologists must be unbiased, but all that means in regards to this community is that I am not here to judge the Wikipedia subculture.

I will make a few promises to this community and I hope that you will accept them, even if you have no reason to do so. I will not reveal any information that I gather to anyone except for my advisor. If I think that my observations may be of any assistance to this community, I will hand them over to you all (the community as a whole) to use as you see fit. That all being said, I am an incredibly opinionated individual and will probably find myself in a situation where I want to post and just might do so with the understanding that those opinions won’t find their way into my observations. I hope that eventually, after I have earned your trust, you might feel comfortable in sharing some of your experiences with me so that I can better flesh out my ethnography.

If anyone who is part of the Wikipedia subculture wants to contact me, they can do so through this forum and I will be more than happy to incorporate their views as well.

So with that, thank you in advance for letting me tag along with you on what might just turn out to be a ride more wild than Mr. Toad's.

Posted by: Lar

QUOTE(Julie @ Fri 27th November 2009, 10:52pm) *

I wanted to take a moment to introduce myself and in an exercise of full disclosure explain my rationale for joining this community. First of all, my name is Julie and I am studying the psychology of subcultures. What does that mean exactly? I study subcultures that exist within imagined communities found on the internet.

(...snip...)

So with that, thank you in advance for letting me tag along with you on what might just turn out to be a ride more wild than Mr. Toad's.


You'll probably want a new thread for your discussions. Good luck with your research.

One question, are you using the term Imagined communities the way the WP article describes the term?

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(Julie @ Fri 27th November 2009, 9:52pm) *

I wanted to take a moment to introduce myself and in an exercise of full disclosure explain my rationale for joining this community. First of all, my name is Julie and I am studying the psychology of subcultures. What does that mean exactly? I study subcultures that exist within imagined communities found on the internet.


Welcome, Julie —

I feel obliged to say that your "exercise of full disclosure" falls a bit short of the mark. I am willing, however, to call it a "scratch" and would certainly encourage you to try a truer start off the blocks.

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Julie

QUOTE(Lar @ Fri 27th November 2009, 7:47pm) *

One question, are you using the term Imagined communities the way the WP article describes the term?


Yes and no. The definition from Wikipedia is accurate, but doesn't take into consideration social and cultural changes. Imagined communities is a term used in cultural anthropology to describe any community that isn't based on a physical reference group. Yes, there are opportunities to meet participants in an imagined community, but it isn't a regular thing or the normal way to interact with one another. In terms of Wikipedia, it means that most of the interactions happen without being face to face. This past summer I did some research on encapsulated marginals who are part of the online gaming subculture. All of their social interactions took place within the realms of imagined communities on the internet.

QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Fri 27th November 2009, 7:54pm) *

Welcome, Julie —

I feel obliged to say that your "exercise of full disclosure" falls a bit short of the mark. I am willing, however, to call it a "scratch" and would certainly encourage you to try a truer start off the blocks.

Jon Awbrey


I'm confused as to what you are getting at and invite you to actually come out and state what you are accusing me of either in a PM or through these forums.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Fri 27th November 2009, 10:54pm) *

QUOTE(Julie @ Fri 27th November 2009, 9:52pm) *

I wanted to take a moment to introduce myself and in an exercise of full disclosure explain my rationale for joining this community. First of all, my name is Julie and I am studying the psychology of subcultures. What does that mean exactly? I study subcultures that exist within imagined communities found on the internet.


Welcome, Julie —

I feel obliged to say that your "exercise of full disclosure" falls a bit short of the mark. I am willing, however, to call it a "scratch" and would certainly encourage you to try a truer start off the blocks.

Jon Awbrey


Agree with Jon. "Julie" is Poetlister, until I see or hear otherwise.

Sounds promising, though, once proof of identity that resolves somewhere other than London is established.

Posted by: Somey

QUOTE(Julie @ Fri 27th November 2009, 8:52pm) *
That all being said, I am an incredibly opinionated individual and will probably find myself in a situation where I want to post and just might do so with the understanding that those opinions won’t find their way into my observations.
Sounds like you'll fit right in! smile.gif

QUOTE
I hope that eventually, after I have earned your trust, you might feel comfortable in sharing some of your experiences with me so that I can better flesh out my ethnography.
Well, there was this time when I was dating this really rich girl, and then one night I mentioned the word "abortion," and next thing ya know, she won't return my phone calls... But I'm guessing that's not the sort of experience you had in mind.

QUOTE
So with that, thank you in advance for letting me tag along with you on what might just turn out to be a ride more wild than Mr. Toad's.
But that isn't really saying much, is it? I mean, if it were wilder than Space Mountain, or maybe the Millenium Force at Cedar Point or the The Steel Dragon at Nagashima Spa Land... that would be something.

QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 27th November 2009, 10:27pm) *
Agree with Jon. "Julie" is Poetlister, until I see or hear otherwise.
Well, around here everybody is Poetlister, at least until they pass the "oily finger-pull" initiation test.

QUOTE
Sounds promising, though, once proof of identity that resolves somewhere other than London is established.
Western half of the USA for the first two posts, actually... I hope Julie will forgive me for narrowing things down just slightly, but you can never be too careful with those Londoners!

QUOTE(Julie @ Fri 27th November 2009, 10:20pm) *
...The definition from Wikipedia is accurate, but doesn't take into consideration social and cultural changes. Imagined communities is a term used in cultural anthropology to describe any community that isn't based on a physical reference group. Yes, there are opportunities to meet participants in an imagined community, but it isn't a regular thing or the normal way to interact with one another. In terms of Wikipedia, it means that most of the interactions happen without being face to face. This past summer I did some research on encapsulated marginals who are part of the online gaming subculture. All of their social interactions took place within the realms of imagined communities on the internet.
You'll definitely want to start a new thread, then. Most of us actually are interacting with each other face to face, as we'll all being held prisoner in the back room of a bowling alley in Cleveland, OH. Luckily the facility has pretty good wireless internet, and a fully-stocked Coke machine...

QUOTE
I'm confused as to what you are getting at and invite you to actually come out and state what you are accusing me of...
Never mind him. Also, if anyone asks you to "send pics," try to just ignore that too.

Posted by: Julie

QUOTE(Somey @ Fri 27th November 2009, 10:38pm) *

Western half of the USA for the first two posts, actually... I hope Julie will forgive me for narrowing things down just slightly, but you can never be too careful with those Londoners!


I actually sent PM's to both posters in which I hope to have clarified things, so you revealing the western US isn't too much info at all.

In a PM with another forum member, I tried to explain exactly what I am hoping to achieve. In cultural anthropology, anthropologists create an ethnography through various ways. Hands down, the most effective way (ok, so I am biased here) is through participant observations. The anthropologist joins a society and eventually becomes enough of a participant that they are no longer observers and their presence no longer changes the behavior. The example I used was Dian Fossey and her gorillas. Not that I am equating myself with Dian Fossey or WR with gorillas, but it's an analogy that is usually effective.

I have to admit that there is a little tiny bit of me that is slightly hurt that what I posted wasn't taken at face value, but then the logical side says, 'if you were in their boat, you'd do the same thing, Jules - suck it up and turn it into opportunity to establish trust.'

I'm still doing a lot of reading here, but once I decide the first topic of my ethnography I'll do as was suggested earlier and start a new thread smile.gif

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

I participated in an academic study of WP editors once. The researcher, a graduate student working on his dissertation, provided his name, the name of his institution (University of Michigan) and the name of his adviser. His project, although a relatively non-intrusive survey was vetted prior to proceeding by a committee concerned with the rights of human subjects. I was provided a written advisement of these facts and my written permission was obtained prior to my participation. I think things like these are what Jon is referring to when he says your full disclosure falls a little short.

Posted by: Somey

QUOTE(Julie @ Sat 28th November 2009, 12:57am) *
I actually sent PM's to both posters in which I hope to have clarified things, so you revealing the western US isn't too much info at all.

I'll still probably be accused of "spying" on you by a certain person over at Encyclopedia Dramatica, but hey, in for a penny, in for a pound... rolleyes.gif

QUOTE
In cultural anthropology, anthropologists create an ethnography through various ways. Hands down, the most effective way (ok, so I am biased here) is through participant observations. The anthropologist joins a society and eventually becomes enough of a participant that they are no longer observers and their presence no longer changes the behavior.

That's actually something I've been saying for a couple of years now - we've been seeing a lot of data (and related conclusions) about Wikipedia coming from statisticians, and quite a few of them appear to agree with what we've been observing, but IMO the only proper way to study a system like WP is to gather as much anecdotal and experience-derived evidence as possible and try to extrapolate as best you can. Statistics are too malleable in an environment where you never know who anybody is (or how many accounts they're using) or why they do it. Creating proper control groups and base points is next to impossible.

Posted by: gomi

Welcome, Julie. It might do well to remember that you can study the social structures of higher mammals by living among them, but no one has yet proven that Wikipedia editors -- and especially disillusioned ex-Wikipedia editors -- are in fact higher mammals. In any case, good luck.

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Fri 27th November 2009, 11:08pm) *
I participated in an academic study of WP editors once. The researcher ... provided his name, the name of his institution ... and the name of his adviser. ...


Perhaps another way of expressing what GBG is saying is: "Has this been approved by your Human Subjects Committee?" We have a member here who at one time involuntarily enrolled us all in his study of affective communication, to the unhappiness of, I think, all involved.

Posted by: Cock-up-over-conspiracy

QUOTE(Somey @ Sat 28th November 2009, 6:43am) *
You'll definitely want to start a new thread, then.

I'll say it again, yous admins ought to start a "Newcomers" forums. You need to help exiting newcomers into the post-Wiki experience.

Julie,

strange to blow your own cover with your first post ... do you think that means we won't shoot at you too? Any good anthropologist would come bearing gifts in the first place. I'd say the best thing to do is make a sockpuppet account now, and start editing again as an anonymous.

Basically, the way it works (tm) is to start by criticizing Julie so we will think you are someone else. Then have "Julie" defend herself but be a real twat. We will all take sides with your sockpuppet account, then you have "Julie" leave the project in a hissy fit, so we think it is all over, but you continue to edit on with your sockpuppet account. We will know none the better. Except the admins, who will use it to blackmail you later.

If you are going to play anthropologist, you are going to have to strip off, dress up, paint your face and join in some of the tribal rituals. Puppet wars being one.

So, I'd start by framing the relationship between WR and WP in the mode of ritual warfare. WP, being the far larger and dominant tribe, busy enough with its own internecine warfare. WR, being the more evolved, sagacious and intelligent tribe (ha!), occupying the moral high ground.

Don't worry what your professors think or say, relax, have some fun with it. If you are an undergrad just doing an essay, it really does not matter. If you are over 18 (21 in some states), posting an attractive picture of yourself online WILL help (it does not really matter if it is you or not). This being the Wiki tribe, someone has probably already started to stalk you, and will find out now anyway. It is really only a matter of time ...

Try by starting to edit on some Pee-dia topics relating to Israel-Palestine, Japan-Korea, any obscure East Europe ex-Soviet state ... or removing some of the hard core pornography. I suppose if you really want to do this properly, you ought to move onto the couch of one of the protagonists for a few weeks and observe them in their home environment. Any chance of going undercover as an intern at the Foundation offices like the PETA girls do to animal abusers?

So ... what exactly do you make of the prurient interests of the dominant gorillas in other tribe anyway?

Posted by: Cock-up-over-conspiracy

... I forgot the closing </irony> tag.

But you realize that there is a good deal of truth to what I wrote, as per 'the other place'.

Posted by: Cedric

QUOTE(Julie @ Fri 27th November 2009, 10:20pm) *

This past summer I did some research on encapsulated marginals who are part of the online gaming subculture. All of their social interactions took place within the realms of imagined communities on the internet.

That experience should serve you well. Wikipedia also has an online gaming subculture.

If you are looking for a primer, I would suggest the WR Blog (link at upper right corner).

Posted by: thekohser

Julie, it would seem that Jon and I have demonstrated the first lesson -- serious people who've had their time massively wasted by pseudonymous frauds are hesitant to welcome the intentions of yet another "first name only" newcomer, until proven to be sincere.

I think we're on the right path now (via e-mail and PM), but your introduction to this Great Ape will have to wait until I'm done with The Animal Kingdom (and several other Disney properties).

Gregory Kohs

Posted by: zacherystaylor

Hi I just joined.

I noticed the bias on Wikipedia a while ago when I moved off of low profile archaeology pages. In most cases I have found it more of an annoyance than a serious problem. One of the claims I have read about was a Lava Lamp which I couldn't care less about and many fringe subjects most of which are bad but even the legitimate mysteries are being censored or misrepresented.

However the thing that made me take Wikipedia censorship and internal bickering serious was the way they handled violence prevention. I saw what they had on the School Shooting page about solutions and it was primarily about gun control. I thought there should be much more about preventing the bullying and child abuse that preceded the problem. This led me to do some work to find sources to back it up. I wound up creating the Preventing School violence page and wound arguing over every little detail.

This led me to think there is a serious problem about a very important subject and I thought wikipedia could do a lot to set a better example for the Mass Media if they got over their internal bickering.

I wound up taking my work off Wikipedia where it would be read by a much smaller audience and I also created a page to help reform Wikipedia since I believe it could be a very important project to provide free education material for the public if it is done right.

For more about this if your interested see the following pages about preventing violence

http://zakherys.tripod.com/nonviolence.htm

and Wikipedia censorship

http://zakherys.tripod.com/wikipedia_censorship.htm

BTW I’m using the same Username and they will figure it out so don’t worry about it.

Good day

Posted by: pablo

Checking in; just here to have a look around this 'moral high ground'

pablo

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(pablo @ Sat 28th November 2009, 4:38pm) *

Checking in; just here to have a look around this 'moral high ground'

pablo


You were misinformed.

They tend to grow lower down, and it's the wrong season, anyway.

You might try http://thegreatmorel.com/ and http://www.morelmushroomhunting.com/.

Happy Hunting!

Jon alien.gif

Posted by: Daniel Brandt

QUOTE(Julie @ Fri 27th November 2009, 8:52pm) *

I wanted to take a moment to introduce myself and in an exercise of full disclosure explain my rationale for joining this community. First of all, my name is Julie and I am studying the psychology of subcultures. What does that mean exactly? I study subcultures that exist within imagined communities found on the internet.

Just make sure http://www.gened.arizona.edu/dgibbs/thes.htm. If you are, you http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/russmag.html, not this site.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

Although I think people are going overboard in giving Julie the third degree -- let's not act like Wikipedia, boys and girls, give her a chance to participate before speculating about her intentions -- nonetheless, Daniel makes an interesting point about anthropology. An acquaintance of my studied anthropology at Harvard back in the 60s, and went to Mexico as part of the Harvard Chiapas Project, which pretty much designed and created the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zapatista_Army_of_National_Liberation. The British are famous for sending anthropologists/spooks into colonial possessions to profile indigenous populations with an eye to manipulating them, or using anthropologists/spooks to profile and manipulate subcultures within the U.S. (see Gregory Bateson (T-H-L-K-D).)

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Sat 28th November 2009, 8:27pm) *

Although I think people are going overboard in giving Julie the third degree — let's not act like Wikipedia, boys and girls, give her a chance to participate before speculating about her intentions — nonetheless, Daniel makes an interesting point about anthropology. An acquaintance of my studied anthropology at Harvard back in the 60s, and went to Mexico as part of the Harvard Chiapas Project, which pretty much designed and created the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zapatista_Army_of_National_Liberation. The British are famous for sending anthropologists/spooks into colonial possessions to profile indigenous populations with an eye to manipulating them, or using anthropologists/spooks to profile and manipulate subcultures within the U.S. (see Gregory Bateson (T-H-L-K-D).)


The Wikipedia Review — unlike Wikipedia — is a non-fiction site.

Unlike Wikipedia we don't have to buy the premiss of every storyline.

Sure, we put on the occasional put-on, but all our parodies — unlike Wikipedia — are clearly marked.

"Julie" brought this on by affecting an intention of "full disclosure" — and then tossing out one red herring after another when we asked for the bare minimum that might be expected of that.

If "she" really had a serious academic purpose in the first place, she would recognize a sailed ship by now and go ask for an incomplete — post haste.

But no, she continues to play it out, which proves that the game is all that matters.

And of course there are those of you who will continue to play along — but I'm guessing mostly because the parody has now become well-marked enough to qualify as repertoire for Da Revue.

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Hougoumont

I've been reading the Review for ages but never bothered to sign up. I singed up because I like to edit on wikipedia, and I just can't stand the power tripping cabal who are wrecking it! On here I find out who is who and whats what. At least here you can get to see who are the real jokers, and yes they do read the Review! The good, the bad and the down right ugly on the hall of fame/infamous http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showforum=57

Posted by: Zoloft

A bit late of me for this thread, but I feel I should mention a few reasons I signed up here.

- deletion of most fair use images on Wikipedia, reducing its utility enormously
- extreme hostility towards new editors
- mawkish, corrupt antics by those in positions of power
- entertainment value of some WR members
- asymptotic curve of WP dissolution, and a need to discuss the aftermath of its deterioration

Posted by: Minor4th

Hello smile.gif

Posted by: Moulton

Hello. Are you a musical chord?

Posted by: Minor4th

QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 29th July 2010, 6:00pm) *

Hello. Are you a musical chord?


I am, but there's really no such thing as a minor 4th. dry.gif

Posted by: Moulton

A lot of content on WP is like that.

Posted by: Lar

QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 29th July 2010, 7:21pm) *

A lot of content on WP is like that.

A lot of your song parodies are like that! yak.gif

Posted by: Moulton

Well, yeah, but they're just silly song parodies. It's not like they're BLPs about real people, with real reputations to be soiled and stigmatized.

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(Minor4th @ Thu 29th July 2010, 6:36pm) *

Hello smile.gif


Bugger Off …

Jon tongue.gif

Posted by: Cock-up-over-conspiracy

QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 30th July 2010, 12:05am) *
Well, yeah, but they're just silly song parodies.

I am sorry but even I refuse to to parodies of Wings' songs (You'd think that people would have had enough of dirty Wikipedia porn ... But I look around me and I see it isn't so ... Some people wanna fill the world with dirty Wikipedia porn ... And what's wrong with that? I'd like to know, 'cause here I upload again ... I love Wikipedia ...).

So, instead, welcome to The Damned.

Is he really editing the Wikipedia?

I got a feeling inside of me
It's kind of strange like a stormy sea
I don't know why I don't know why
I guess these things have got to be

We gotta editor we hooked him good
Guess we knew that we always would
We all stop to mess him around
We got a brand new editor in town

See them edit edit articles that belong us
We will revert them then we start to fuss
If we can't make them run away
Then we will banned then for another day

We gotta editor we hooked him good
Guess we knew that we always would
We all stop to mess him around
We got a brand new editor in town

You never thought this could happen to you
Why is it so strange even when your edits are true?
You don't deserve to edit our work is great
You'd better leave it'll soon be too late

I got a feeling inside of me
It's kind of strange like a stormy sea
I don't know why we have to edit war
May be cos we still too young to drink and fight in a bar

We gotta editor we hooked him good
Guess we knew that we always would
We all stop to mess him around
We got a brand new editor in town



Posted by: ulsterman

QUOTE(Minor4th @ Thu 29th July 2010, 11:36pm) *

Hello smile.gif

Hello. It might be less confusing to call yourself Lower 4th. (For American's, that's 8th grade.)

Posted by: Moulton

Minor4th, I see you are working on the Law Project on Wikipedia.

I would appreciate http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity_talk:Community_Review/Status_of_Moulton#Abolishing_the_Wikipedia_Bans_As_a_Governance_Tool.

Posted by: Minor4th

QUOTE(ulsterman @ Fri 30th July 2010, 5:20am) *

QUOTE(Minor4th @ Thu 29th July 2010, 11:36pm) *

Hello smile.gif

Hello. It might be less confusing to call yourself Lower 4th. (For American's, that's 8th grade.)


Are you confused?



QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 30th July 2010, 6:38am) *

Minor4th, I see you are working on the Law Project on Wikipedia.

I would appreciate http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity_talk:Community_Review/Status_of_Moulton#Abolishing_the_Wikipedia_Bans_As_a_Governance_Tool.


I will take a look and let you know what I think.


Why is it combining my two posts into one?

Posted by: ulsterman

QUOTE(Minor4th @ Fri 30th July 2010, 4:17pm) *

Are you confused?

Not me, but then I'm a genius, and modest with it. tongue.gif
QUOTE

Why is it combining my two posts into one?

it does that if you post twice to the same thread within a few minutes. It's a feature, not a bug.

Posted by: CharlotteWebb

QUOTE(Minor4th @ Fri 30th July 2010, 3:17pm) *

QUOTE(ulsterman @ Fri 30th July 2010, 5:20am) *

Hello. It might be less confusing to call yourself Lower 4th. (For American's, that's 8th grade.)

Are you confused?

If only you knew.

Posted by: Minor4th

QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Fri 30th July 2010, 4:22pm) *

QUOTE(Minor4th @ Fri 30th July 2010, 3:17pm) *

QUOTE(ulsterman @ Fri 30th July 2010, 5:20am) *

Hello. It might be less confusing to call yourself Lower 4th. (For American's, that's 8th grade.)

Are you confused?

If only you knew.


Do tell.

Posted by: EricBarbour

QUOTE(Minor4th @ Sat 31st July 2010, 4:21pm) *
QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Fri 30th July 2010, 4:22pm) *
QUOTE(Minor4th @ Fri 30th July 2010, 3:17pm) *
QUOTE(ulsterman @ Fri 30th July 2010, 5:20am) *
Hello. It might be less confusing to call yourself Lower 4th. (For American's, that's 8th grade.)
Are you confused?
If only you knew.
Do tell.

I'll drop a http://my.hsj.org/Schools/Newspaper/tabid/100/view/frontpage/schoolid/317/articleid/133215/newspaperid/293/Catalina_Catastrophe_8th_Graders_trip_cut_short_by_fire.aspx. biggrin.gif

Posted by: Minor4th

I don't really know where to post this -- I am still getting familiar with the navigation here.

Has anyone posted anything here about the correspondence between the FBI and WMF over the use of the FBI seal on Wiki?

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Minor4th @ Fri 6th August 2010, 8:05am) *

I don't really know where to post this -- I am still getting familiar with the navigation here.

Has anyone posted anything here about the correspondence between the FBI and WMF over the use of the FBI seal on Wiki?


Long thread http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=30346&view=findpost&p=246371

Posted by: Minor4th

Thanks. I was going to comment about Godwin and his unprofessional reply but it looks like it's all been said (almost).

Posted by: Minor4th

UGH!!!!

Posted by: Michaeldsuarez

I didn't really want to waste time introducing myself, but an impersonator at YouTube is forcing my hand. I'm introducing myself solely so that you won't mistakenly confuse me with the impostor.

I haven't really done anything important at Wikipedia. http://community.wikia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&page=User%3AMichaeldsuarez, but I was desysoped for off-site "trolling". By "trolling", they meant my activity at Encyclopedia Dramatica. Wikia believed that having an ED user moderate Wikia would scare advertisers away and attract negative attention. I stopped using Wikia since I lost interest in video games (documenting video games is Wikia's strong point) and fan-fiction (I'm a nerd as expected with most Wikipedians).

I used to edit Encyclopedia Dramatica under my real name, but I later changed it to "JuniusThaddeus". "Junius" is a reference to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junius, while "Thaddeus" is just a random Greek name; I simply wanted "jt" to be the initials. I later became a ED sysop (the selection was held privately, and I haven't asked why they chose me yet).

I started two sockpuppetry cases at Wikipedia. The http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Stopallspam, while the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Grace_Saunders. This is how I meant the impersonator; the impersonator was Stopallspam. Stopallspam hates Atheists and homosexuals, and I suspect that he suffers from mental issues, which is why he's obsessed with me. He created http://www.youtube.com/user/JuniusThaddeus"JuniusThaddeus.

The JuniusThaddeus from YouTube isn't me. http://www.youtube.com/user/Michaeldsuarez is my real YouTube account, and Stopallspam (dubbed "AARmy" by some YouTubers) has spammed the comments channel with his sockpuppets.

I don't have any qualms about being associated with ED or troll groups, but I refuse to be associated with hate groups. I don't hate Atheists or homosexuals, so please don't confuse the impostor with the real me. I figured I let you all know before the wrong conclusions are drawn. Sorry for taking up space.

Edit: I have reason to fear the wrong conclusions being drawn since several members here took the poorly-written joke on Herostratus' user page serious and accused him of being incarcerated for pedophilia. Plus there appears to be some confusion at http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=30626.

Posted by: The Joy

Hi Michael. Welcome to the Review!

Do you recall the Wikia-OblivoWiki War?

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=21261&hl

Posted by: Michaeldsuarez

QUOTE(The Joy @ Tue 31st August 2010, 10:50pm) *

Hi Michael. Welcome to the Review!

Do you recall the Wikia-OblivoWiki War?

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=21261&hl


I wasn't a member of OblivioWiki during the Gravewit era. I only joined after Wikia bought it. I prefer uesp.net to the OblivioWiki.

From what I've heard, Gravewit was the owner of gamewikis.org. Gravewit stole gamewikis.org to Wikia without telling the community that he was responsible to. Gravewit was embarrassed and forced to leave.

All of the original OblivioWiki community is gone, and I'm basically gone too. I failed to create a new community, so I left "Mbjones90" in charge of the project. The OblivioWiki is a sinking ship. If you're interested, you can join uesp.net. uesp.net is basically as bureaucratic as Wikipedia (a major flaw), but they're a little looser and they're independent of Wikia.

Thanks for the welcome.

Posted by: Seurat

I evidently forgot to post here earlier. Oops. ermm.gif

Posted by: occono

Hello. I was welcomed in another topic, I missed this one.

Posted by: Zoloft

Welcome to Wikipedia Review.

We have a small complimentary kit for you.

*dumps bag out on table*


Posted by: Axmann

I can't figure out whether my account validated successfully o.o I made it with my university e-mail and got the account made, but I'm not sure if it's been reviewed by a moderator/admin yet. Is there any way to find this out?

Posted by: Zoloft

QUOTE(Axmann @ Sun 21st November 2010, 1:31pm) *

I can't figure out whether my account validated successfully o.o I made it with my university e-mail and got the account made, but I'm not sure if it's been reviewed by a moderator/admin yet. Is there any way to find this out?

If you are here, you were successful.

Welcome.

Posted by: Hurricane

I just want to say hello to everyone. I'm not sure how often I'll post something but I do lurk a lot. evilgrin.gif

Posted by: Zoloft

QUOTE(Hurricane @ Mon 22nd November 2010, 3:44am) *

I just want to say hello to everyone. I'm not sure how often I'll post something but I do lurk a lot. evilgrin.gif

Welcome to the board. Come for the Weltanschauung, stay for the Schadenfreude!

Posted by: ZHurlihee

Longtime lurker (relatively speaking) freshly banned by Xeno for God knows what.

Hi all.

Posted by: The Joy

QUOTE(ZHurlihee @ Mon 5th September 2011, 10:09pm) *

Longtime lurker (relatively speaking) freshly banned by Xeno for God knows what.

Hi all.


If I earned a Sacajawea Dollar for every time someone said that, I'd be a millionaire! smile.gif

Welcome to the Review.

Posted by: ZHurlihee

QUOTE(The Joy @ Tue 6th September 2011, 2:35am) *

QUOTE(ZHurlihee @ Mon 5th September 2011, 10:09pm) *

Longtime lurker (relatively speaking) freshly banned by Xeno for God knows what.

Hi all.


If I earned a Sacajawea Dollar for every time someone said that, I'd be a millionaire! smile.gif

Welcome to the Review.


Thanks for the welcome. Are people banned often with little or no rationalle given?

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(ZHurlihee @ Tue 6th September 2011, 9:56am) *

Thanks for the welcome. Are people banned often with little or no rationalle given?


Not only often, but multiple times!

Posted by: The LabRat

Hiya. I'm new (derp). Long time reader, first time poster, etc.

Honestly, I haven't directly had a lot of problems at Wikipedia (some content disputes but nothing major) but I've seen a lot of crazy crap that makes me shake my head (significantly safer than a combo headdesk/facepalm). I'm one of the (apparently) rare chick types over there but I can't say that I've had any issues on that score either (and Sue Gardner's article kind of makes me cranky). But I can see the potential for me getting into trouble there when I finally run into that one crazy who just chaps my hide, as they say. So here I am.

Back to lurking and reading.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

Welcome. Lurk on, but post if the spirit moves you.

Posted by: gomi

Moderator's note: the discussion following the announcement by our new member mnemonic (Mike Godwin, the former WMF counsel), has been split to http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=36105.