Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Piperdown

2 Quacks (new interwebs 3.0 lingo for disgraced Wikipedia Admins - redundant, I know) are all in a tizzy over fat men coming back. Who knew that nervous nutters preferred hairy plumper bears?

Meds, stat, to the Wackypedia Ex-Admin Ward of the Very Very Nervous. Little Lord Powerranger and Napolean Boobaparte are in need of comforting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Quack_quack

Posted by: Obesity

borrrrrrrring. I thought this thread was going to be about Aurora Snow, the, er, film actress who quacks various sitcom themes:

http://auroratv.ytmnd.com/

Posted by: Piperdown

Gott Damm!

This is serious stuff, all you Bruce Lee Wannabees. Can't some (de facto) ex-admins get an admin brother to explicit harbor ill will towards someone who's taking away time from serious editing of Power-Rangerpedia?

I mean, gott damm! He threw "inherently" and "de facto" into the same sentence. Hey, could you guys recommend him for law school?



Sorry, man, not notable. Plus her ta-ta's don't meat the JzG Standard. Not to be confused with the Mendoza Line.

Fess up, fat. You're already a made admin...

Posted by: Obesity

Ms. Snow, admittedly, boasts some of the most sorry-looking, small, droopy cans in the adult film world, but she has a wonderfully cute face... and that quacking sound she does is really something else...

Perhaps she even takes requests.... I really like the Small Wonder theme. "She's a miracle, and I'll grant you / She'll enchant you at first sight!" She's (quack) a (quack) small (quack) won(quack)der(quack). And so on in this fashion.

Posted by: everyking

I had no idea you were so poorly regarded by some in the Wikipedia community, Obesity. Based on your interactions here, I assumed you were Mr. Popularity. Could you describe what exactly happened to cause this block?

Posted by: Obesity

umm, you know. The standard reasons....

LaRouche POV-pushing
Having a pro pedophilia userbox
Calling someone a "bastard bitch from hell" in an IRC room
persistent recreation of the Brian Peppers article
getting mad at someone for voting against me in my RfA and calling his employer to complain that he edits WP at work
Obscene trolling in German
being a "serial timewaster"
kissing Durova and making her cry

I can't remember.

I may also made have made a crack about JzG's moustache.

Posted by: everyking

You did all that? You scoundrel! You low down dirty dog. How do you even sleep at night?

Posted by: The Joy

On a bed, I presume.

Posted by: Somey

Mr. Obesity was blocked for http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cool_Hand_Luke/Archive_10&diff=prev&oldid=317591745#Phew, i.e., violating the most important Unwritten Rule of Wikipedia: no Humor Attempts.

The blocking admin decided the attempt was not funny, and unblocked him shortly thereafter.

Seriously, that's exactly what happened...

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

I can't follow all this without a program. Does this mean that harej (T-C-L-K-R-D) is actually the FM? But what about the EWPL ("editing while Pro-LaRouche") charge -- is there any substance to that? Because that would mean that the FM is actually me.

Posted by: Cla68

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:CharlesJohnson22/JohnBambenek is really funny, as is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:The_Fat_Man_Who_Never_Came_Back/JohnBambenek. Will Beback appeared to recognize fairly quickly that he was being had and got the heck out of there. Ryulong, on the other hand...

Posted by: MBisanz

I know harej well enough to be able to state he is not the FM.

Posted by: EricBarbour

I would find humor in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Quack_quack, except for the presence of Ryulong and Tznkai, making the
usual flaming pigheaded asses of themselves.......

Posted by: Malleus

It has always seemed strange to me that admins add block log entries willy nilly, but when their blocks are shown to be demonstrably wrong the block remains on the rap sheet. Where is the log of crap administrator actions?

Posted by: Cla68

I just checked ProQuest NewsStand and found 24 references in reliable sources for John Bambenek. Nineteen of those references, however, were from a single source, the Champaign, Illinois http://www.news-gazette.com/. Checking General OneFile shows that Mr. Bambenek appears to have written a column for The America's Intelligence Wire for the University of Illinois. Thirty-nine of his columns from August 2005 to March 2007 are listed.

If someone had written the article and posted it with all 60+ references listed, I wonder if it would still have been deleted?

Posted by: everyking

Try developing a new article in your userspace. Seriously, if you cite a bunch of those references, it might stand a chance.

Posted by: Cla68

It's a BLP, so no go. The article's subject, however, does appear to want the article to be in Wikipedia.

Posted by: everyking

What, you don't edit BLPs?

Posted by: Cla68

I do, of course. But, I'm trying to get better.

Posted by: Obesity

And to think I was http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=331318898 when I http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:CharlesJohnson22/JohnBambenek&diff=331249035&oldid=331206329 in my back pocket to help me find reliable Bambenek sources!

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

Ach, so.

Posted by: Tarc

Never heard of this person in a wiki sense, but it does ring a faint 15-20 year old bell from Usenet past.

Posted by: Cla68

Perhaps Casliber might be interested in this one, because it looks to me that if the author of this article had done things differently the first time it was posted, things might have turned out differently.

Posted by: Milton Roe

Ah, you ask a perennial question asked here many times.

Wikipedia is somewhat like law enforcement in this. If you're arrested in way you manage to successfully sue the cops about, procedure-wise, the arrest still stays on your rap sheet (or contact record). You must go through an entire separate procedure to get it expunged. But the screwups of each individual cop remain in their private personnel files, and are NOT visible to the public. Thus, any cop who stops you, can look up ever contact you've ever had with the police, on his car computer. Can do this BEFORE deciding to arrest you. You, however, can't find out a thing about your detaining or arresting officer and how many times he's been reamed for unprofessional behavior by his commander.

We've suggested before that every WP admin needs a sprotected "complaint sheet" attached to his account, which (s)he cannot edit. (He can make complaints about outright vandalisms or scatology from others, but it has to be removed by a third party). Each complaint (limited to so-many words) can be answered by the admin with the same word limit. There may be up to 3 cycles of this per complaint, with the complainee getting the last word. And all this just sits there, forever. Any complainer about this admin in the future can have it to refer to. And of course it's useful when the admin comes up for RfA on the new term limits plan.

And no barnstars on the thing! Put those on the admin's user talk page.

Posted by: dogbiscuit

Ah, the old "Are you known to the police?" It turns out there is good reason not to be on the British DNA database. You can be on there whether you are a criminal or not. In one recent case, a person was attacked. At first the police were not sure of the story so they thought it might have been a fight and so they wanted DNA. Naive person complies, even though at this point the police know he is the victim. 6 months later he got stopped for a trivial parking offence, but as he denied being known to the police, he got a really hard time and was threatened. The police considered him guilty of something as they did not understand the implications of their own processes.

As ever, the problems of the real world are reflected in Wikipedia, and Wikipedia hasn't a clue that the problems of the way it works are well rehearsed.

Posted by: Cla68

Judging by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:The_Fat_Man_Who_Never_Came_Back/JohnBambenek#Reliable_sources of sources, John Bambenek probably does meet Wikipedia's current notability standards. He is a noted and quoted expert on cyber-security issues, a columnist and editor for a mid-major newswire service (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America%27s_Intelligence_Wire is used as a reference in about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/America%27s_Intelligence_Wire), a guest columnist for his city's newspaper, a book author, a national delegate for the Republican party, and a local politician and activist. Who was the first admin who decided that this guy wasn't notable and banned all mention of the guy from Wikipedia? Was it JzG?

Update: Here's the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bambenek.

Posted by: everyking

If I recreated the article, what do you suppose would happen to me? Could I expect to be burned or boiled alive, or would they choose a comparatively humane method of execution?

Posted by: Cla68

To be fair to the editors and admins involved in this, the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/John_C._A._Bambenek_(3rd_nomination) the article was up for AfD was in 2006. A lot of what he has done to make himself notable has happened since then.

Posted by: Cla68

Hmm, I guess the next article draft in someone's userspace for the future John Bambenek article may need to have a http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AThe_Fat_Man_Who_Never_Came_Back%2FJohnBambenek&action=historysubmit&diff=332245471&oldid=331926256.

Posted by: Sarcasticidealist

G8 doesn't apply to user talk pages.

Your friendly neighbourhood Wikilawyer