Wikimedia UK's Fæ, A new name for an old face Options

[carbuncle]

I has the misfortune to look at the list of trustees for Wikimedia UK that was posted in the WR thread about Wikimedia UK's charity status. One name is particular jumped out at me - Ashley Van Haeften.

Ashley Van Haeften is currently known on WP as User:Fæ. They make no secret of this in the context of Wikimedia UK. As Fæ states on their userpage dealing with privacy:

My contributions to Wikipedia are under the name "Fæ" with legitimate doppelgängers of Fae and Faelig (these are my only other accounts, if there is any need for me to create more alternative accounts these would be in compliance with WP:SOCK#LEGIT). This account name is a convenient nom de plume. I will disclose necessary information on request such as my legal name, contact details or discuss possible areas of conflict of interest for administrative purposes. Please note that gathering personal information by data-mining or by analysing contributions on Wikipedia, across sister projects or elsewhere when not for an agreed bureaucratic process is considered a serious breach of the Privacy policy. --Fæ (talk) 13:22, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

It seems odd that someone who is elsewhere openly identifying themselves and their WP username would make such comments about their off-site identity. Perhaps it would be instructive to look at Fæ's RfA. Recall Fæ's userpage declaration that they had no other accounts. There was some reference made in the RfA to having a previous username, which prompted some discussion, but did not prevent the RfA from succeeding:

I accept. For reasons of disclosure it should be noted that after an RFC/U which caused me to refocus and improve my Wikipedia editing I took the option of a clean start, though I have never been blocked. Prior to this nomination I spoke privately with one of the critical contributors to the discussion, who knows both account names and we have resolved our concerns. I will recuse myself of admin requests related to editors who gave an opinion in that discussion. This is the first time I have had an RFA nomination. Fæ (talk) 22:00, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I can confirm that Fæ took the time to talk with one of his prior critics (not me,fwiw), letting them know both old and new account names. Fæ has also informed Arbcom of the prior account name.
I have looked over the contributions of old and new account names, and can also confirm that Fæ has refocused, in many ways. John Vandenberg (chat) 03:54, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

<snip intervening discussion>
I am not Newman Luke and had never heard of this account until my RFA was running. I have never been banned from any topic or article or had any sort of ban imposed on me, ever. I interpret my "refocus" as a more positive style of interaction including active avoidance of drama, as part of clean start avoiding unnecessary interaction with editors that were part of past drama and moving my spheres of interest to new topics to become a more generalist Wikipedian and avoiding the articles which were the sites of previous disputes without it being a complete self-ban. I would intend to continue in the same positive style after this RFA regardless of outcome. Fæ (talk) 08:02, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Although it does appear that their editing has moved to new areas, perhaps if editors outside of ArbCom had been aware of Fæ's old username and the specifics of their previous actions, they may have felt differently about granting admin rights to Van Haeften.

Fæ was previously known as User:Ash. Prior to that, they were Ashleyvh and Teahot. I'm sure there were others as well. Ash is probably best known for tag-teaming with Benjiboi in his efforts to fill WP with BLPs of unremarkable gay porn stars. The end of that particular episode is loosely discussed in this WR thread. The now banned Benjiboi has since been exposed as a prolific sockpuppeteer and POV-pusher, so I doubt Van Haeften would welcome his association with that particular user.

Ash "left" WP with claims that someone had threatened him with some form of violence (that person was never named, but he claimed in email that it was not me). It remains unclear to me if this threat was real or imagined (or fabricated), but Ash claimed to be leaving WP because of it. In reality, even as they were posting statements like "As I am no longer actively contributing to articles you may wish to drop me an email in notification", they were already "actively contributing" as Fæ. The RfC that Van Haeften was allowed to duck out of via this deception was largely about the fraudulent use of references in BLPs. Although the evidence was not particularly strong, it seemed to be part of a long-standing pattern of misuse of sources to push particular POVs. I have no doubt that the RfC would have ended poorly for Ash (and Van Haeften clearly saw the writing on the wall).

[thekohser]

Ashley's LinkedIn profile says he's a "Senior Consultant" for a company called TBL. Here's their website, according to Ash:

http://www.tblco.com/

Looks like a really top-notch business.

[EricBarbour]

Fæ was previously known as User:Ash. Prior to that, they were Ashleyvh and Teahot. I'm sure there were others as well. Ash is probably best known for tag-teaming with Benjiboi in his efforts to fill WP with BLPs of unremarkable gay porn stars. The end of that particular episode is loosely discussed in this WR thread. The now banned Benjiboi has since been exposed as a prolific sockpuppeteer and POV-pusher, so I doubt Van Haeften would welcome his association with that particular user.

Yeah, and that really ended well. (Benjiboi is still socking, just as a little reminder.)

This is all very routine. You kiss ass on Wikipedia, then the WMF (or an affiliate thereof) gives you a paying job.
They are practicing good old-fashioned logrolling nepotism. They run like a city government. Corruption, lying,
backstabbing, massive incompetence. Only difference: the world wants Wikipedia, but doesn't need it.

This post has been edited by EricBarbour:

[tarantino]

I has the misfortune to look at the list of trustees for Wikimedia UK that was posted in the WR thread about Wikimedia UK's charity status. One name is particular jumped out at me - Ashley Van Haeften.

I guess Ash really is a glutton for punishment, or perhaps punishing.

(IMG:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Man_in_stress_position.jpg/367px-Man_in_stress_position.jpg)
Description Man in stress position.jpg
English: Man in stress position or partial suspension bondage.
Date 4 November 2008(2008-11-04)
Source Own work
Author Teahot

... (and Van Haeften clearly saw the writing on the wall).

Or maybe the stomach.

[EricBarbour]

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

And what was Teahot doing on en-wiki? Well.......

User contributions for Teahot

18:15, 4 September 2009 (diff | hist) Suspension bondage ‎ (→Vertical suspension: clarify)
18:14, 4 September 2009 (diff | hist) Suspension bondage ‎ (→Vertical suspension: adding image of man in vertical partial suspension (to balance all other images being women))
12:20, 1 September 2009 (diff | hist) Hogtie ‎ (→Use in consensual erotic bondage: adding example image)
12:18, 1 September 2009 (diff | hist) Talk:Hogtie bondage ‎ (→Add male pictures)
09:59, 31 August 2009 (diff | hist) Kristian Digby ‎ (Adding portrait)
06:56, 8 August 2009 (diff | hist) m Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tennis expert ‎ (→Report date July 25, 2009, 09:32 (UTC): x-ref to WQA)
00:53, 6 August 2009 (diff | hist) Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tennis expert ‎ (Summary)
11:59, 5 August 2009 (diff | hist) Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tennis expert ‎ (→Report date July 25, 2009, 09:32 (UTC): slight reformat and qualification)
11:54, 5 August 2009 (diff | hist) Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tennis expert ‎ (→Report date July 25, 2009, 09:32 (UTC))
08:32, 5 August 2009 (diff | hist) Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tennis expert ‎ (→Report date July 25, 2009, 09:32 (UTC))
06:01, 29 July 2009 (diff | hist) m Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gay bathhouse regulars ‎ (→List of gay bathhouse regulars: unsplit my infinitive, grammar!)
06:00, 29 July 2009 (diff | hist) m Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gay bathhouse regulars ‎ (→List of gay bathhouse regulars: noting name change)
05:46, 29 July 2009 (diff | hist) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gay bathhouse regulars ‎ (→List of gay bathhouse regulars)
15:20, 28 July 2009 (diff | hist) m Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gay bathhouse regulars ‎ (→List of gay bathhouse regulars: wording)
15:17, 28 July 2009 (diff | hist) m Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gay bathhouse regulars ‎ (→List of gay bathhouse regulars: r)
11:18, 27 July 2009 (diff | hist) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gay bathhouse regulars ‎ (→List of gay bathhouse regulars: clarification)
09:09, 27 July 2009 (diff | hist) m Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gay bathhouse regulars ‎ (→List of gay bathhouse regulars)

That guy has gone thru a lot of accounts. And is probably still socking like mad.

This post has been edited by EricBarbour:

[Peter Damian]

I believe this is him here (with clothes on). http://bambuser.com/channel/pigsonthewing/broadcast/2140981

This is excellent. The CC shouldn't be swayed (in principle) by the bondage thing. The ganging up with Benjiboi to promote the interests of commercial pornographers on Wikipedia is something else entirely.

Note the Fae is not a paid director. Nor are any of the other director trustees. The only salaried person is Richard Symonds (Chase Me). However, the trustees have considerable powers to influence how grants are allocated.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[Alison]

And who created the article, "List of Gay bathhouse regulars"? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif) Ash (T-C-L-K-R-D) did, of course.

"Inclusion on this list does not imply that the person had or does engage in sexual activity at gay bathhouses or that the individual identifies as gay, has any particular sexuality or endorses any particular political or moral view on gay bathhouses."

*sigh*

[carbuncle]

This is excellent. The CC shouldn't be swayed (in principle) by the bondage thing. The ganging up with Benjiboi to promote the interests of commercial pornographers on Wikipedia is something else entirely.

The "bondage thing", while attention-grabbing, really isn't relevant to Wikimedia UK's charity status at all and I can see no reason why it should be mentioned in any dealings with the relevant charity authorities.

In the context of WP, it is simply another example of the popular phenomenon of using WP as a vehicle to advance one's own goals and ignoring the inherent conflict of interest. True, posting images of yourself in bondage is a bit more extreme that, say, writing an article about yourself, but shades of the same thing. Using WP to display your vacation snaps or write a bio of your spouse is a time-honoured tradition on WP, especially among admins.

[Peter Damian]

This is excellent. The CC shouldn't be swayed (in principle) by the bondage thing. The ganging up with Benjiboi to promote the interests of commercial pornographers on Wikipedia is something else entirely.

The "bondage thing", while attention-grabbing, really isn't relevant to Wikimedia UK's charity status at all and I can see no reason why it should be mentioned in any dealings with the relevant charity authorities.

In the context of WP, it is simply another example of the popular phenomenon of using WP as a vehicle to advance one's own goals and ignoring the inherent conflict of interest. True, posting images of yourself in bondage is a bit more extreme that, say, writing an article about yourself, but shades of the same thing. Using WP to display your vacation snaps or write a bio of your spouse is a time-honoured tradition on WP, especially among admins.

Agree 100%. I have written this up off-wiki in a way that hopefully makes this clear. I have even ignored the gay thing, which is also irrelevant. What extremely relevant is the promotion of commercial websites by by administrators or trustees, and the resulting conflict of interest.

[edit]
I met him on the 13th at the ghastly wiki-meetup. I quizzed him quite closely on what WMUK was actually for and got no intelligent answer. I was on the lines of 'the Vatican is digitising manuscripts, universities are digitising manuscripts, the Warburg is working on digitising manuscripts and incunabula (early printed books), so how is this any different from what WMUK is proposing to do? Why shouldn't the Warburg get a grant of £1m for its work on open content'.

He was quite evasive, but on the lines of, their grants have to involve doing it the MediaWiki way. The Warburg cannot just publish a digital manuscript on its website, it has to be open etc etc. This was exactly what I wanted him to say. This is also the reason I revived the dispute about the LogicMuseum. I want to demonstrate that the Wikipedia organisation is promoting its own way of doing things (which the Charity Commission expressly prohibits them from doing, per case law from 1957), and also has a "monopoly on knowledge", by prohibiting outbound links to non-wikipedia sites, such as the LogicMuseum.

And of course I love the idea that a WMUK director was promoting outbound links to gay porn sites, one of which has a section on '**very young-looking males** sprawled on a sofa masturbating', while at the same time Ckatz is blocking links to a site which includes extremely rare and difficult to obtain medieval Latin texts. I mean, I can only repeat the cliche that "you really can't make it up". You really can't make it up, can you?


This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[mbz1]

And who created the article, "List of Gay bathhouse regulars"? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif) Ash (T-C-L-K-R-D) did, of course.

"Inclusion on this list does not imply that the person had or does engage in sexual activity at gay bathhouses or that the individual identifies as gay, has any particular sexuality or endorses any particular political or moral view on gay bathhouses."

*sigh*

Here's a deletion request for List of gay bathhouse regulars.
It is interesting that by the end of that AfD Teahot (T-C-L-K-R-D) started signing as Teahot (migrating to Ash) (T-C-L-K-R-D)

BTW Ash menaged to introduce unwanted knoledge even in such safe (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif) place as Wikipedia:SPI

The fake title of this SPI request appears to be a deliberate act intended to cause offence and inflame argument. See [[Rusty trombone]] - "Rusty trombone is a euphemism for a sexual act in which a man stands with his knees and back slightly bent, with feet at least shoulder width apart in order to expose the anus." Please close and delete this SPI on that basis. [[User:Ash|Ash]] ([[User talk:Ash|talk]]) 22:34, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

And you are saying that the user who wrote " List of gay bathhouse regulars" and the above comment in SPI is now director trustee with WMF, and Wikipedia administrator!

While I am on this SPI it is interesting to notice that the subject of this SPI, this very one after whom SPI was given such "fake title" that it appeared "to be a deliberate act intended to cause offence and inflame argument." (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/scream.gif) was blocked indefinetely over this poem.

This post has been edited by mbz1:

[thekohser]

Note the Fae is not a paid director. Nor are any of the other director trustees. The only salaried person is Richard Symonds (Chase Me). However, the trustees have considerable powers to influence how grants are allocated.

What was all this, then?

Chief Executive 60,000
Office Manager 25,000
Events Manager 30,000
Communications 20,000
Developer 30,000

[thekohser]

And who created the article, "List of Gay bathhouse regulars"? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif) Ash (T-C-L-K-R-D) did, of course.

Is there a publicly-viewable page that indicates Ash (T-C-L-K-R-D) created that page? Now that it's deleted, I don't immediately see how you check who created it. Or, is that an admin-only function? If admin-only, could I get a screen shot for proof, please?

[Peter Damian]

Note the Fae is not a paid director. Nor are any of the other director trustees. The only salaried person is Richard Symonds (Chase Me). However, the trustees have considerable powers to influence how grants are allocated.

What was all this, then?

Chief Executive 60,000
Office Manager 25,000
Events Manager 30,000
Communications 20,000
Developer 30,000

Sorry, yes, there are many other paid people. However, none of the trustees are paid.

[thekohser]

Sorry, yes, there are many other paid people. However, none of the trustees are paid.

Which is standard procedure for most non-profit orgs.

[Peter Damian]

Sorry, yes, there are many other paid people. However, none of the trustees are paid.

Which is standard procedure for most non-profit orgs.

I was replying to someone's comment that if you kiss ass on Wikipedia, then the WMF (or an affiliate thereof) gives you a paying job. That is not true of Fae, who kissed ass to get a trusteeship.

The position of other Wikipedians who are getting paying jobs, such as Richard Symonds, is different. I don't know whether Richard kissed any asses though.

[carbuncle]

While I am on this SPI it is interesting to notice that the subject of this SPI, this very one after whom SPI was given such "fake title" that it appeared "to be a deliberate act intended to cause offence and inflame argument." (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/scream.gif) was blocked indefinetely over this poem.

And currently editing as User:38.109.88.218...

[mbz1]

I just looked at Meta, and there is a user suggesting using more random wikipedians on personal appeals versus using Jimbo alone.
So I tried to figure out what personal appeal would have written user Fæ.
Maybe something like this:

I feel like I’m living the first line of my obituary.

I don’t think there will be anything else that I do in my life as important as what I do now for Wikipedia. We’re not just building an encyclopedia, we’re working to make people free.
When we have access to free knowledge, we are better people.
We understand the world is bigger than us, and we become infected with tolerance and understanding. Right now there is still not enough tolerance and understanding on Wikipedia.
For example I wrote an article "List of gay bathhouse regulars." The users who have not yet become infected with either tolerance or understanding voted to delete it.
This example demonstrates that we all have lot's of work to do in order to make people free by providing them with a free knowledge, and in order to do this we need more money.
Remember when you give to Wikipedia, you’re supporting free knowledge around the world.
You’re not only leaving a legacy for your children and for their children, you’re elevating people around the world who have access to this treasure.
So please make your donation now, please ensure that your children and grandchildren would not be deprived from a knowledge about gay bathhouse regulars.
I am trustee director with Wikimedia Foundation, so you could rest assure your donations would be spend for a good purpose.
Thank you,

(Disclosure:Some parts of this imaginary appeal were copied from the real appeal by Brandon Harris)
(Disclosure:I was going to post it to Meta Forum, but then I decided WR is a safer place for such appeals (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif) )

This post has been edited by mbz1:

[Peter Damian]

(Disclosure:I was going to post it to Meta Forum, but then I decided WR is a safer place for such appeals)

I think your decision may have been wise.

[mbz1]

(IMG:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Man_in_stress_position.jpg/367px-Man_in_stress_position.jpg)[/url]
Description Man in stress position.jpg
English: Man in stress position or partial suspension bondage.
Date 4 November 2008(2008-11-04)
Source Own work
Author Teahot

... (and Van Haeften clearly saw the writing on the wall).

Or maybe the stomach.

the image is gone. Only jimbo is left

This post has been edited by mbz1:

[Alison]

(IMG:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Man_in_stress_position.jpg/367px-Man_in_stress_position.jpg)[/url]
Description Man in stress position.jpg
English: Man in stress position or partial suspension bondage.
Date 4 November 2008(2008-11-04)
Source Own work
Author Teahot

... (and Van Haeften clearly saw the writing on the wall).

Or maybe the stomach.

the image is gone. Only jimbo is left

(show/hide) 15:45, 26 November 2011 Blurpeace (talk | contribs | block) deleted "File:Man in stress position.jpg" ‎ (User requested) (view/restore) (global usage; delinker log)

[Alison]

And who created the article, "List of Gay bathhouse regulars"? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif) Ash (T-C-L-K-R-D) did, of course.

Is there a publicly-viewable page that indicates Ash (T-C-L-K-R-D) created that page? Now that it's deleted, I don't immediately see how you check who created it. Or, is that an admin-only function? If admin-only, could I get a screen shot for proof, please?

No there isn't, as it's admin-only. Here's a screenshot, though, which is the best I could do;

(IMG:http://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu328/alliewiki/th_ScreenShot2011-11-26at41715PM-1.png)

Interesting that someone originally PRODded it, but Benjiboi swooped in a few minutes later to remove the tag (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hrmph.gif)

[TungstenCarbide]

(IMG:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Man_in_stress_position.jpg/367px-Man_in_stress_position.jpg)[/url]
Description Man in stress position.jpg
English: Man in stress position or partial suspension bondage.
Date 4 November 2008(2008-11-04)
Source Own work
Author Teahot

... (and Van Haeften clearly saw the writing on the wall).

Or maybe the stomach.

the image is gone. Only jimbo is left

(show/hide) 15:45, 26 November 2011 Blurpeace (talk | contribs | block) deleted "File:Man in stress position.jpg" ‎ (User requested) (view/restore) (global usage; delinker log)

Damn, Wikipedia Loves censorship when it suits their agenda.

[mbz1]

(IMG:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Man_in_stress_position.jpg/367px-Man_in_stress_position.jpg)[/url]
Description Man in stress position.jpg
English: Man in stress position or partial suspension bondage.
Date 4 November 2008(2008-11-04)
Source Own work
Author Teahot

... (and Van Haeften clearly saw the writing on the wall).

Or maybe the stomach.

the image is gone. Only jimbo is left

(show/hide) 15:45, 26 November 2011 Blurpeace (talk | contribs | block) deleted "File:Man in stress position.jpg" ‎ (User requested) (view/restore) (global usage; delinker log)

Oh, no, what a pity! And how about a free knowledge? It should not be deleted like that, and now they left such an important article with no illustration (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ermm.gif)

[tarantino]

(IMG:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Man_in_stress_position.jpg/367px-Man_in_stress_position.jpg)[/url]
Description Man in stress position.jpg
English: Man in stress position or partial suspension bondage.
Date 4 November 2008(2008-11-04)
Source Own work
Author Teahot

... (and Van Haeften clearly saw the writing on the wall).

Or maybe the stomach.

the image is gone. Only jimbo is left

(show/hide) 15:45, 26 November 2011 Blurpeace (talk | contribs | block) deleted "File:Man in stress position.jpg" ‎ (User requested) (view/restore) (global usage; delinker log)

Oh, no, what a pity! And how about a free knowledge? It should not be deleted like that, and now they left such an important article with no illustration (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ermm.gif)

Ash released the image to the public domain, and Webcite still remembers it.

[Cla68]

Damn, Wikipedia Loves censorship when it suits their agenda.

Does this mean that "User:Fæ" reads WR?

[Peter Damian]

Is this within the general rules observed in Commons? The fact that VH took the picture would not be enough to have it deleted, because of the terms of the licence. If it was actually him in the picture, then privacy might be sufficient. But then he gave permission for the picture to be released, so does that apply? And if it wasn't him in the picture, but took the picture or simply uploaded it, then wanting the picture deleted to prevent embarrassment to a director of WMUK is not sufficient reason either.

I am going onto Commons right now to demand that information must be free.

[edit] I have started a discussion here http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=63058705

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[mbz1]

Is this within the general rules observed in Commons? The fact that VH took the picture would not be enough to have it deleted, because of the terms of the licence. If it was actually him in the picture, then privacy might be sufficient. But then he gave permission for the picture to be released, so does that apply? And if it wasn't him in the picture, but took the picture or simply uploaded it, then wanting the picture deleted to prevent embarrassment to a director of WMUK is not sufficient reason either.

I am going onto Commons right now to demand that information must be free.

[edit] I have started a discussion here http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=63058705

No, this is not within the general rules observed in Commons. Images as donations cannot be taken away. If for one reason or another an uploader wants the image off, the image should be nominated on deletion and most of the times it will not get deleted.

[carbuncle]

Looks like the cat is out of the bag on WP:

Were you previously User:Ash?
I ask because I remember this RFC on the user (Ash departed wikipedia under a cloud.) [1]. There seems to be rather strong evidence that you and Ash are one and the same. Maybe a redirect from the old account and a talk merge, as was done with Teahot, is in order?Bali ultimate (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

[mbz1]

Looks like the cat is out of the bag on WP:

Were you previously User:Ash?
I ask because I remember this RFC on the user (Ash departed wikipedia under a cloud.) [1]. There seems to be rather strong evidence that you and Ash are one and the same. Maybe a redirect from the old account and a talk merge, as was done with Teahot, is in order?Bali ultimate (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Some administrators doing their best in order to cover up their prior accounts.
For example Gwen Gale used account The Witch. But she does not like it to be redirected to her current account.

Of course all her talk page history from this account and other sock accounts was deleted against all wikipedia rules.

Everything that was left from the talk history of the Witch was a small single ... period, yes a period like this one ".".
Still the stupidest Gwen's lackey removed even this small period with an edit summary "courtesy blanked" (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/jawdrop.gif) , but Gwen bravely (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hrmph.gif) undid that "courtesy blanking" with edit summary: "thanks Daedalus but it's not needed : )" (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)
I wish somebody would have asked Gwen why the Witch is not redirected to her current account. After all the Witch was used to violate Gwen's topic ban on gays and lesbian topics, and then Gwen lied about using the Witch account in both of her RfAs.

This post has been edited by mbz1:

[thekohser]

Barbara Streisand Effect about to take effect on Monday morning, on Examiner.com.

Ashley Van Haeften, if you wish to discuss how this will be portrayed in my story, you have 20 hours to contact me.

Gregory Kohs
National Wiki Edits Examiner

[mbz1]

And who created the article, "List of Gay bathhouse regulars"? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif) Ash (T-C-L-K-R-D) did, of course.

Yes, as well as Pleasuredrome (T-H-L-K-D) and Chariots Shoreditch (T-H-L-K-D)
and List of films featuring gay bathhouses (T-H-L-K-D)
that are advertising gay saunas.
He also created quite a few articles about pornographic actors (Who could have thought pornographic actors are so notable that they should have Wikipedia's entries (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/confused.gif) but I guess for a free knowledge (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) it's OK. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

What I cannot understand how come that Fæ, who started his contributions on 28 March 2010 with creating redirect for "Fairy (gay slang)", could have had a successful RfA just a year later.

I've always thought that about 3 years of positive contributions are required before passing RfA.

Question to Larry Sanger.
Larry, I know that you are not with Citizendium anymore, but probably you'd know response to my question that I am asking out of a simple curiosity.

Let's say I'd make an account with Citizendium, providing my real name and other required information. Let's say I'd write a well sourced article like this one Pleasuredrome (T-H-L-K-D). Would it be allowed to stay in Citizendium ? Thanks.

This post has been edited by mbz1:

[Kelly Martin]

I've always thought that about 3 years of positive contributions are required before passing RfA.

Where'd you get that idea? Three months is enough if you have sucked all the right cocks.

[the fieryangel]

With Benjiboi, we had a smoking gun in that he had Dj'd at a party given by Michael Lucas that was hosted by Sister Roma, who both work in the Porn industry. The connections were obvious (Sisters of Perputual Indulgence, SF chapter: Sister

From this, it's quite obvious that our friend Ash has gay porn on the brain. Many gay men do. However, I'm not seeing the connection to the porn ndustry, other than these articles created. It could be that he's just doing this to gain access to these gay porn stars via their blogs etc. However, he seems to spend an awful lot of time doing this stuff just to be a "fanboi".

I'm wondering exactly what the company that he's susposed to work for actually does? Maybe he does promotional work for gay porn studios?

In any case, I'd like to find this "missing link"...

[carbuncle]

With Benjiboi, we had a smoking gun in that he had Dj'd at a party given by Michael Lucas that was hosted by Sister Roma, who both work in the Porn industry. The connections were obvious (Sisters of Perputual Indulgence, SF chapter: Sister

From this, it's quite obvious that our friend Ash has gay porn on the brain. Many gay men do. However, I'm not seeing the connection to the porn ndustry, other than these articles created. It could be that he's just doing this to gain access to these gay porn stars via their blogs etc. However, he seems to spend an awful lot of time doing this stuff just to be a "fanboi".

I'm wondering exactly what the company that he's susposed to work for actually does? Maybe he does promotional work for gay porn studios?

In any case, I'd like to find this "missing link"...

It was always my feeling that Ash's interest in gay porn performers (and English bathhouses) was personal rather than professional. It may also have been partly ideological as well, since both he and Benjiboi were quick to throw out insinuations of homophobia about those who were trying to get rid of the worst of the gay porn BLPs. I never found any indication that Ash had a professional connection to porn studios (but I wasn't really looking for one, either).

[TungstenCarbide]

Barbara Streisand Effect about to take effect on Monday morning, on Examiner.com.

Ashley Van Haeften, if you wish to discuss how this will be portrayed in my story, you have 20 hours to contact me.

Gregory Kohs
National Wiki Edits Examiner

can't wait

[carbuncle]

I've always thought that about 3 years of positive contributions are required before passing RfA.

Where'd you get that idea? Three months is enough if you have sucked all the right cocks.

See this ANI thread entitled "Admin conduct review requested", which suggests that rather soon after his successful RfA, there were rumblings from fellow admins about whether or not he should have been given the tools. I'm not suggesting that the fix was in, but it's clear that the RfA was tainted by the somewhat disingenuous statements by ArbCom member John Vandenberg about Van Haeften's earlier accounts.

[EricBarbour]

See this ANI thread entitled "Admin conduct review requested"

That was started by Xenophrenic (T-C-L-K-R-D) .

Ever looked at Xenophrenic's userpage history? It's fascinating.

(cur | prev) 00:06, 10 November 2007‎ Chaser (talk | contribs)‎ m (empty) (Changed protection level for "User:Xenophrenic": reducing per editor's request; editor's block log indicates Gnangarra no longer believes him to be a sockpuppet, so original reason for protection is mute [edit=autoconfirmed:move=sysop])
(cur | prev) 04:55, 20 February 2007‎ Gnangarra (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (remove sockpuppet tag from user)
(cur | prev) 14:29, 16 February 2007‎ Gnangarra (talk | contribs)‎ (145 bytes) (sockpuppetproven)
(cur | prev) 14:10, 16 February 2007‎ Gnangarra (talk | contribs)‎ (139 bytes) (fix link to sockpuppeteer)
(cur | prev) 14:04, 16 February 2007‎ Gnangarra (talk | contribs)‎ m (138 bytes) (Protected User:Xenophrenic: sockpuppet - confirmed by checkuser, user keeps removing tag violating probation [edit=sysop:move=sysop])
(cur | prev) 14:02, 16 February 2007‎ Gnangarra (talk | contribs)‎ (138 bytes) (sockpupet tag added with links to decisions)
(cur | prev) 13:49, 16 February 2007‎ Gnangarra (talk | contribs)‎ m (17 bytes) (Reverted edits by Xenophrenic (talk) to last version by TDC)
(cur | prev) 03:22, 16 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Removed vandalism. Please cease.)
(cur | prev) 03:11, 16 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes)
(cur | prev) 02:06, 16 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Removed vandalism.)
(cur | prev) 00:12, 16 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (rv)
(cur | prev) 17:26, 14 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Vandalism removed.)
(cur | prev) 12:39, 14 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (leave the tag be or I will have the page protected)
(cur | prev) 08:23, 14 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Removed vandalism.)
(cur | prev) 03:40, 14 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (the jury is in Rob, and you are most certainly a sock)
(cur | prev) 06:29, 13 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Removed vandalism.)
(cur | prev) 21:11, 12 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (see talk, Rob, three admins agree with me on this one, this is a legitimate tag)
(cur | prev) 21:01, 12 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Removed vandalism.)
(cur | prev) 20:43, 12 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (its right in your block log Rob, if you disagree take it up with the admins who sanctioned you)
(cur | prev) 20:14, 12 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Stop the vandalism, Rob. Last warning.)
(cur | prev) 16:32, 12 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (rob, leave it be, this is now a well established fact)
(cur | prev) 20:42, 10 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Removed userpage vandalism again, please cease)
(cur | prev) 13:43, 10 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (it is now beyond a doubt)
(cur | prev) 16:51, 8 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Removed vandalism)
(cur | prev) 12:16, 8 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes)
(cur | prev) 08:40, 8 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Very funny)
(cur | prev) 23:17, 7 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (←Created page with '{{Sockpuppeteer}}')

This post has been edited by EricBarbour:

[mbz1]

Looks like the cat is out of the bag on WP:

Were you previously User:Ash?
I ask because I remember this RFC on the user (Ash departed wikipedia under a cloud.) [1]. There seems to be rather strong evidence that you and Ash are one and the same. Maybe a redirect from the old account and a talk merge, as was done with Teahot, is in order?Bali ultimate (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I'm now convinced that you and User:Ash are one and the same. This makes it crystal clear [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Simon_Corcoran&action=history]. How do you propose that this be handled going forward? Certainly knowledge of your editing as both User:Ash and User:Teahot would have been relevant to your RFA -- and, perhaps (one can hope) to your appointment to Wikimedia's UK board of directors. I'll probably bring this to a broader venue soonish.[[User:Bali ultimate|Bali ultimate]] ([[User talk:Bali ultimate|talk]]) 13:01, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

[thekohser]

Fæ was previously known as User:Ash. Prior to that, they were Ashleyvh and Teahot.

Is there iron-clad evidence of the Ashleyvh --> Teahot --> Ash --> Fæ chain of name-changing?

[Eppur si muove]

Fæ was previously known as User:Ash. Prior to that, they were Ashleyvh and Teahot.

Is there iron-clad evidence of the Ashleyvh --> Teahot --> Ash --> Fæ chain of name-changing?

There is for the first two. Looking at user (talk) pages

12:09, 15 April 2009 Anonymous Dissident (Talk | contribs) moved User:Ashleyvh to User:Teahot ‎ (Automatically moved page while renaming the user "Ashleyvh" to "Teahot") (revert)

02:43, 27 July 2009 Kingturtle (Talk | contribs) moved User talk:Teahot to User talk:Ash ‎ (Automatically moved page while renaming the user "Teahot" to "Ash") (revert)

The rest involves inferences from the first user name and edit patterns.