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

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Global blocklist request, - shankbone.org in trouble again ....
Alison
post Sat 3rd October 2009, 1:26am
Post #1


Skinny Cow!
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,514
Joined: Tue 26th Jun 2007, 8:08pm
From: Kalifornia
Member No.: 1,806



I was just on Meta a few mins ago, renewing my sysop status when I noticed the following being requested at Talk:Spam blacklist;

QUOTE

shankbone.org

Links to this blog are being inserted by David Shankbone, the owner of the blog, to promote it. For every image David uploads to Wikimedia Commons, he adds a link to his blog; in other words, he is a shameless self-promoter who wants to increase the number of visitors to his blog and its PageRank. This should be added to the spam blacklist.

See this: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...it=500&offset=0
...and this:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:...g.shankbone.org (1166 pages)
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...ael+Lucas&go=Go (Note that he is also part of an effort to promote pornographer Michael Lucas, who he knows in real life, and his "works".)

J. from Nevada 216.241.55.204 23:31, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

It should be interesting to see how this pans out on Meta blink.gif evilgrin.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
carbuncle
post Sat 3rd October 2009, 1:33am
Post #2


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,601
Joined: Sun 30th Mar 2008, 4:48pm
Member No.: 5,544



QUOTE(Alison @ Sat 3rd October 2009, 1:26am) *

I was just on Meta a few mins ago, renewing my sysop status when I noticed the following being requested at Talk:Spam blacklist;

QUOTE

shankbone.org

Links to this blog are being inserted by David Shankbone, the owner of the blog, to promote it. For every image David uploads to Wikimedia Commons, he adds a link to his blog; in other words, he is a shameless self-promoter who wants to increase the number of visitors to his blog and its PageRank. This should be added to the spam blacklist.

See this: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...it=500&offset=0
...and this:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:...g.shankbone.org (1166 pages)
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...ael+Lucas&go=Go (Note that he is also part of an effort to promote pornographer Michael Lucas, who he knows in real life, and his "works".)

J. from Nevada 216.241.55.204 23:31, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

It should be interesting to see how this pans out on Meta blink.gif evilgrin.gif

This link should provide a little insight.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Sat 3rd October 2009, 1:43am
Post #3


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

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

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE
the following being requested at Talk:Spam blacklist:
QUOTE

shankbone.org

Links to this blog are being inserted by David Shankbone, the owner of the blog, to promote it. For every image David uploads to Wikimedia Commons, he adds a link to his blog; in other words, he is a shameless self-promoter who wants to increase the number of visitors to his blog and its PageRank.


mellow.gif huh.gif hmmm.gif ... ohmy.gif ohmy.gif ohmy.gif

Shocking revelation, there.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alison
post Sat 3rd October 2009, 1:43am
Post #4


Skinny Cow!
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,514
Joined: Tue 26th Jun 2007, 8:08pm
From: Kalifornia
Member No.: 1,806



QUOTE(carbuncle @ Fri 2nd October 2009, 6:33pm) *

This link should provide a little insight.

Ah! Shankers thinks it's Jonas Rand blink.gif "J. from Nevada" indeed biggrin.gif

Oh dear! Looks like they're gunning for our David hmmm.gifWhoever it is, they're picking up all their tips from WR tongue.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
FreiheitBaguette
post Sat 3rd October 2009, 6:33am
Post #5


Neophyte


Group: On Vacation
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed 23rd Sep 2009, 4:24am
From: USA
Member No.: 14,098



I believe it's time that I reveal that I use the IP 216.241.55.204 (all posts signed as "J." or "J from Nevada"), Nevadawp, and Nevadawp2. Mr. Miller is absolutely correct, and let me give a simple explanation as to why he knows that.

I posted a comment on one of his blog posts, giving my e-mail address and name. He knows, because he has targeted me with attacks on Encyclopedia Dramatica. He logs in, checks the comments on his posts, and realize that I've commented. He sees my IP. Meanwhile, he was aware of the fact that this IP has edited on Talk:Men of Israel, an complete propaganda piece which he basically owns and protects. He decides to use the fact that I'm "Banned" as an excuse to revert my edits. Which is more harmful: me stating my opinon of an "article", or a pornographer's friend who uploads his "work" to an "encyclopedia" site, and then goes to speak at a school? (Ask the editor-in-chief of EB [not ED] if he would publish a puff piece about a pornographic film that promotes tourism to Israel, written by the director's friend no less)

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Appleby
post Sat 3rd October 2009, 10:12am
Post #6


Member
***

Group: On Vacation
Posts: 167
Joined: Wed 9th Sep 2009, 2:45pm
Member No.: 13,585



QUOTE(FreiheitBaguette @ Sat 3rd October 2009, 7:33am) *

Ask the editor-in-chief of EB [not ED]

I doubt that WP works to the same rules as EB. For a start, there aren't many under 18s writing for EB, still less trying to supervise and control the writers.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Sat 3rd October 2009, 2:10pm
Post #7


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



QUOTE(FreiheitBaguette @ Sat 3rd October 2009, 2:33am) *

I believe it's time that I reveal that I use the IP 216.241.55.204 (all posts signed as "J." or "J from Nevada"), Nevadawp, and Nevadawp2. Mr. Miller is absolutely correct, and let me give a simple explanation as to why he knows that.

I posted a comment on one of his blog posts, giving my e-mail address and name. He knows, because he has targeted me with attacks on Encyclopedia Dramatica. He logs in, checks the comments on his posts, and realize that I've commented. He sees my IP.


It is no surprise to me that David Shankbone uses IP info collected by his blog to mete out vengeance on Wikimedia projects. This suspicion was one of the reasons why I advocated on the Meta Wikimedia site for the removal of Shankbone's blog from the Planet Wikimedia aggregator.

This was then later held up to me as a reason why I do not contribute "constructively" to Meta.

Everything about ethical accountability is simply upside-down on Wikimedia projects.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mike R
post Sat 3rd October 2009, 2:24pm
Post #8


feo pero que bien baila
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri 20th Feb 2009, 7:58pm
Member No.: 10,394

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Alison @ Fri 2nd October 2009, 8:26pm) *

I was just on Meta a few mins ago, renewing my sysop status when I noticed the following being requested at Talk:Spam blacklist;

QUOTE

shankbone.org

Links to this blog are being inserted by David Shankbone, the owner of the blog, to promote it. For every image David uploads to Wikimedia Commons, he adds a link to his blog; in other words, he is a shameless self-promoter who wants to increase the number of visitors to his blog and its PageRank. This should be added to the spam blacklist.

See this: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...it=500&offset=0
...and this:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:...g.shankbone.org (1166 pages)
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...ael+Lucas&go=Go (Note that he is also part of an effort to promote pornographer Michael Lucas, who he knows in real life, and his "works".)

J. from Nevada 216.241.55.204 23:31, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

It should be interesting to see how this pans out on Meta :blink: :grin:


It was posted under "removals" rather than "additions". Expect to see it removed by some bureaucratic knucklehead, ostensibly for that reason, shortly.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Chris Croy
post Sat 3rd October 2009, 4:27pm
Post #9


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu 7th Jun 2007, 6:57pm
Member No.: 1,650

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



He contributed some photos. He included a link back to the his website on each page. His website has no ads or content that would be found objectionable. This is done for hundreds of other photo contributors without controversy.

So what's the problem?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cock-up-over-conspiracy
post Sat 3rd October 2009, 4:42pm
Post #10


Now censored by flckr.com and who else ... ???
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,693
Joined: Sat 6th Dec 2008, 6:08am
Member No.: 9,267



QUOTE(Chris Croy @ Sat 3rd October 2009, 4:27pm) *
So what's the problem?

In addition, almost every image he uploads is ...by_david_shankbone.jpg.

There is no more single individual who has exploited the Pee-dia for their personal interests (except, of course, Jimbo) than David Miller. Imagine how awful it would become if everyone was follow his example?

For example, what if I sign off everyone of my edits with '... by_cock-up_over_conspiracy' and include a link to my blog? Imagine if everyone was elbowing each other ... and the content ... out of the way to promote themselves in such a gauche manner.

And then there is the further context of accepting multiple payola from the Israeli Consulate and professional privileged government in order to promote its interests on the Wikipedia.

Do we know how much he actually got off them in cash, airtickets and hotels etc? has that ever been made public?

You have a good case FreiheitBaguette but I think you need some help in framing and presenting it. That you speak out here will probably beheld against you ... so you may as well link back to all the thewikipediareview.com topics if you cannot put in proper complaints and have some fun with it.


It is a bit like going to court. However "good" and "right" you might be .... it is of no use unless you go to the right court, with the right papers, looking just right.

There is a risk if this is not done well it might actually sink the best chance to address these issues. I cannot help you unfortunately ... except for what has been posted here.

This post has been edited by Cock-up-over-conspiracy: Sat 3rd October 2009, 4:46pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Sat 3rd October 2009, 4:48pm
Post #11


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



QUOTE(Chris Croy @ Sat 3rd October 2009, 12:27pm) *

He contributed some photos. He included a link back to the his website on each page. His website has no ads or content that would be found objectionable. This is done for hundreds of other photo contributors without controversy.

So what's the problem?


His website has notoriously hosted personal attack content, including promotion of a page that insulted my four-year-old daughter, and it continues to host attack material. We now have evidence that he's also using the website to harvest IP addresses for retaliatory purposes on Wikimedia projects.

Personally, I'd rather have a peaceful site with ads, than this particularly fulsome alternative.

Chris, if you cannot detect a problem here, then you may be beyond hope.

Fortunately, even with all of Shankbone's efforts to back-link, Shankbone.org remains buried by about 875,400 more popular websites, according to Alexa.com. Indeed, Wikipedia Review reaches about 8 to 10 times more people per week than does Shankbone.org.

This post has been edited by thekohser: Sat 3rd October 2009, 4:54pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Chris Croy
post Sat 3rd October 2009, 5:41pm
Post #12


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu 7th Jun 2007, 6:57pm
Member No.: 1,650

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 3rd October 2009, 8:48am) *

His website has notoriously hosted personal attack content, including promotion of a page that insulted my four-year-old daughter, and it continues to host attack material. We now have evidence that he's also using the website to harvest IP addresses for retaliatory purposes on Wikimedia projects.

I was checking more for "Does he post pics of his dick on the front page?" than anything else. I had been given the impression the answer might be "Yes". As for your links, neither one is close to what I'd consider grounds for blacklisting. If we considered the first link grounds for blacklisting, we'd also have to blacklist almost every newspaper in the country. Calling out a public figure for being inconsistent is absolutely in the domain of journalism. The second one is just attacking people on WR. As we all know, WR posters are worthy of only the greatest derision and no holds are barred when dealing with Them.

I have no idea what anyone's babbling about with regard to IPs and banned users. It would be helpful if someone would explain what exactly FreiheitBaguette was banned for or if they were at all or how what Shankbone did was in any way out of line.

I'm assuming it was ED that attacked your daughter or did someone submit her artwork to Maddox for critique?

---
QUOTE('Cock-up-over-conspiracy')
For example, what if I sign off everyone of my edits with '... by_cock-up_over_conspiracy' and include a link to my blog?

If you see a picture and click on it, you can see a link to Shankbone's blog. If someone sees your name and clicks on it, they can see a link to your blog on your user page. Again, there are many, many photographs that link back to the photographers personal website. This has never been a problem before. Why do you think this is a problem now?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Appleby
post Sat 3rd October 2009, 6:18pm
Post #13


Member
***

Group: On Vacation
Posts: 167
Joined: Wed 9th Sep 2009, 2:45pm
Member No.: 13,585



I realise now why I was confused by this thread. Can you please rename it "blacklist".
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dtobias
post Sat 3rd October 2009, 6:21pm
Post #14


Obsessive trolling idiot [per JzG]
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,213
Joined: Sun 11th Feb 2007, 2:45pm
From: Boca Raton, FL, USA
Member No.: 962

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Call it a BADSITE and say it harasses Wikipedians, and then maybe you can get the ruling clique to ban linking to it for you.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cedric
post Sat 3rd October 2009, 6:40pm
Post #15


General Gato
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,648
Joined: Sun 11th Mar 2007, 5:58pm
From: God's Ain Country
Member No.: 1,116

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 3rd October 2009, 11:48am) *

His website has notoriously hosted personal attack content, including promotion of a page that insulted my four-year-old daughter, and it continues to host attack material. We now have evidence that he's also using the website to harvest IP addresses for retaliatory purposes on Wikimedia projects.


Image Speaking of the shanking blurg, is it just me, or does that caricature just scream "Douchebag!"?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Achromatic
post Sun 4th October 2009, 12:27am
Post #16


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 191
Joined: Sun 16th Dec 2007, 10:32pm
From: Washington State
Member No.: 4,185

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Chris Croy @ Sat 3rd October 2009, 10:41am) *

I have no idea what anyone's babbling about with regard to IPs and banned users.


Not entirely sure what's so difficult to understand. An IP address has an issue with Shankbone on Wiki, so he goes trawling through access logs or similar on his own site, says "A-ha! This is a banned user, because I interacted with him on my own site and he's using the same IP address, ergo, on WP, he should be dealt with as such."

The issue isn't whether or not the IP is blocked (that should be per normal procedures and processes, whatever you may think of them), but of whether or not you think it's moral or ethical to utilize such resources to further your agenda on WP.

To put it bluntly, it was a similar /type/ of thing that was one of the reasons Judd Bagley (WordBomb) was crucified for his role in Weissgate. (He put an image hosted on a webserver in an email he sent to SlimVirgin - then checked the access logs to see who had accessed that image, only to find that moments after SV's IP address accessed the image, so too did what was believed to be Weiss's.) This was (incorrectly) described as spy/malware, etc, etc, and/or immoral/unethical at best and was used as a reason why Wordbomb was Satan himself. (SV protested innocence, and until now has 'no idea' how it happened that GW read the same email she was sent, minutes after she got it).

Good for the goose, good for the gander...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Sun 4th October 2009, 4:28am
Post #17


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

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

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Cedric @ Sat 3rd October 2009, 11:40am) *

Image Speaking of the shanking blurg, is it just me, or does that caricature just scream "Douchebag!"?

Perhaps he's getting a douche, out of frame.

I will say it looks utterly self-contented.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
One
post Sun 4th October 2009, 4:53am
Post #18


Postmaster General
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,553
Joined: Tue 25th Dec 2007, 10:49am
Member No.: 4,284

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 3rd October 2009, 2:10pm) *

It is no surprise to me that David Shankbone uses IP info collected by his blog to mete out vengeance on Wikimedia projects. This suspicion was one of the reasons why I advocated on the Meta Wikimedia site for the removal of Shankbone's blog from the Planet Wikimedia aggregator.

Many site owners do this. Consider, for example, how this tactic was successfully used in the Mantanmoreland wars.

On the rest of the internet, IPs are just a fact of life.


Anyhow, I thought practically everyone on Commons linked to their own site for image credits (and they pretty clearly do it as promotion). Wouldn't a meta blacklist wipe out those Commons links? Image credit promotion doesn't seem like a good reason to blacklist the site--it would be a revolution on Commons, as I understand it.

QUOTE(Chris Croy @ Sat 3rd October 2009, 5:41pm) *

I'm assuming it was ED that attacked your daughter or did someone submit her artwork to Maddox for critique?

Heh. I was just thinking of Maddox as an example of a blogger who has used traffic logs. Some examples in his hate mail.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
CharlotteWebb
post Sun 4th October 2009, 5:05am
Post #19


Postmaster General
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,740
Joined: Mon 18th Jun 2007, 2:09am
Member No.: 1,727

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(One @ Sun 4th October 2009, 4:53am) *

Heh. I was just thinking of Maddox as an example of a blogger who has used traffic logs. [url=http://maddox.xmission.com/hatemail.cgi]Some examples in his hate mail.[/url]

And yet you expect anyone to click on this? huh.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Sun 4th October 2009, 5:31am
Post #20


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



QUOTE(Chris Croy @ Sat 3rd October 2009, 1:41pm) *

As for your links, neither one is close to what I'd consider grounds for blacklisting. If we considered the first link grounds for blacklisting, we'd also have to blacklist almost every newspaper in the country. Calling out a public figure for being inconsistent is absolutely in the domain of journalism. The second one is just attacking people on WR. As we all know, WR posters are worthy of only the greatest derision and no holds are barred when dealing with Them.

...

I'm assuming it was ED that attacked your daughter or did someone submit her artwork to Maddox for critique?


Yes, ED attacked my daughter. A couple of weeks before that, Shankbone announced his financial donation to ED. Then came the ED piece about me, and on the same day, within hours, Shankbone blogged extensively about me, full of falsehoods, and promoting the ED piece within his blog post. I was admonished to assume good faith and swallow that this was all a big "coincidence".

Shankbone was actually compelled to bring down that particular blog post, and others he later wrote about me, because it was either that ultimatum or his blog feed would be removed from the Planet Wikimedia RSS aggregator.

You're really not very educated on the background between David and me, Chris, so I would politely suggest you not try to engage on this particular front until you've better informed yourself.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th 11 14, 12:02pm