Arbcase case centered around "Tag Teams", ...they've finally figured out this happens.... Options

[Carruthers]

In light of the recent topic about the WP:Winner essay, I found that the rapid acceptation of Piotrus 2 arbcom case to be interesting, especially since the case was accepted to discuss the issue of off-wiki "tag teams" being formed to artificially win content disputes. This may be coincidence, but an essay about just this subject has been nominated for deletion recently : WP:Tag Team....and while Folantin diplomatically refuses comment, his fellow "tag teamer" Moreschi comments on the case, naively coming out in support of the person making the "tag team" accusations. Irony is operative word here....

The whole area of Russian nationalism is a problem area, but Piotrus seems like a very productive editor. How the arbcom deals with "off wiki organization" and the whole concept of "editorial tag teams" could have interesting repercussions on the whole system. This is a case to watch.

This post has been edited by Carruthers: Sat 30th August 2008, 12:42pm

[Dzonatas]

Irpen provides evidence and Durova somehow makes it seem like she is a victim (in the case somehow) and asks Irpen to withdraw his statement/evidence.



This post has been edited by Dzonatas: Sat 30th August 2008, 4:25pm

[House of Cards]

There's not just Russian nationalism at play here. From my time on WP, it is clear that the behaviour of some Polish editors is not much better - but with this bit of "WE are the only victims here" dramamongering, they are heremit granted immunity. Nothing will come of this case.

Of course, the German, Dutch, English, Irish, Korean, Freedonian, etc. nationalists all suck, too.

[Cla68]

There's not just Russian nationalism at play here. From my time on WP, it is clear that the behaviour of some Polish editors is not much better - but with this bit of "WE are the only victims here" dramamongering, they are heremit granted immunity. Nothing will come of this case.

Of course, the German, Dutch, English, Irish, Korean, Freedonian, etc. nationalists all suck, too.

I've reviewed at least two and perhaps more articles that Piotrus has been the primary editor on in the A-class review forum for the Military History project. They all seemed like quality articles written within policy to me. In two cases that I know of after Piotrus had completed the articles other editors suddenly appeared and screwed them up with grossly POV edits and contentious debate on the talk pages.

[Carruthers]

It seems that the issue is more related to Polish Nationalists, but this "evidence" gives a very strange "Jewish" twist : citing this as evidence....

. I don't bother with our Lithuanian friends - they were pals or allies of us polacks since centuries - we always get along and will find common ground, mind just Boody and his obvious supporters/sockpuppets who seem to play Jew but they don't sound like that. My impression is they try to impersonate the negative stereotype of Jewish people. That must end once and for all, at least here on Wikipedia. I am for one state Israel/Palestine, see my user page, not very popular idea yet - there is no common ground there - both sides try to undermine each other using all possible ways available including inciting hate against each other. The ones most active in English Wikipedia edit warriors use this tool to antagonize Polish, Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Germans, Jews etc against each other.

...this is getting into the Twilight Zone: So, the story is that there are people who are pretending to be Jewish editors, but are only doing it to make trouble between all the various nationalistic editors?

I should hope that this type of discussion would be countered rather quickly! Even if it's an Arbcom case, there should be limits to what you can say.....

This post has been edited by Carruthers: Mon 1st September 2008, 9:25am