Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: gomi

Since his http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:IronDuke&diff=prev&oldid=394271175 from brief, self-imposed exile, IronDuke (T-C-L-K-R-D) has been routinely accusing our very own Cla68 (T-C-L-K-R-D) of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&diff=prev&oldid=399551722 for a couple of his imaginary arch-enemies. As usual, IronDuke wades into a completely unrelated discussion to pronounce his position.

Cla68, as we know, is not one to back down from a fight, at least when he's right. We http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=30380 once before. The http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AIronDuke&action=historysubmit&diff=378262545&oldid=378122461 IronDuke went scuttling off with his tail between his legs -- we'll see what happens this time.

Posted by: It's the blimp, Frank

Way to go IronDuke! As if being an inveterate POV pusher weren't enough.

Posted by: Tarc

A shame Jayjg can't swoop in to rescue his assistants like in the old days, eh?

Posted by: Cla68

What's up with some of the "pro-Israel" editors? They're so confrontational and adversarial in their approach to editing. Sure, some of the "pro-Palestinian" editors can get a little hostile in content disputes, but, in my experience, they're nowhere near as confrontational as editors like Ironduke, Brewcrewer, and some of the others mentioned in that enforcement thread. Ironduke and several others will go into full-on attack mode on anyone they perceive as a threat to their campaign to push their POV in Israel-related articles. Do they really feel that this is an effective tactic?

Posted by: gomi

Yes, because it very clearly is. IronDuke (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Brewcrewer (T-C-L-K-R-D) , the late, unlamented Brein1007 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , and No More Mr Nice Guy (T-C-L-K-R-D) (the latter two almost certainly someone's socks) get to accuse anyone who disagrees with them of "being a sock puppet of a banned user" or "meatpuppeting for a banned user" or whatever, and some idiot admin or another hits the ban button. IronDuke goes around like a demi-admin, labeling accounts he thinks are socks, and no one does anything about it. Like Jayjg (T-C-L-K-R-D) , when someone has the temerity to call him on it, and doesn't back down, IronDuke goes into hiding until the dust settles, then comes back and starts anew.

So yes, judge from the results -- it is a very effective tactic, in the absence of someone willing to stand up to them.

Posted by: Milton Roe

Shame on you, Cla68. Still meatpuppeting on WP for a couple of banned users who haven't been seen there for more than 4 years, now. And had nothing in common while they WERE there, actually, except that they both had the bad luck to come under notice of SlimVirgin and whoever her retinue happened to be, in 2006. How do you sleep with yourself at night, for such antics? Grow up.*

You know, 2006 is so long ago that I personally can't remember what I was doing then, except that I do remember that disliked SlimVirgin on WP, even then. But Herschel and Gnetworker?? Who the hell were they? Do you keep a diary or album of HerschelKrustovsky views to insert into articles, or something? Clearly IronDuke still lives in those days. Were there iPhones? Did they wear bellbottoms? It all gets messed up in my mind.

MR


*And if you can't grow up, make sure that you launch all your fueled airplanes, and don't wait to change bombs for torpedoes. Dump the aviation gas over the side, fire off your ship torpedoes, and clear the fueling lines to the deck and fill them with CO2.

--Helpfully, Yamamoto Milton (Hey, this Yamato is NICE. Not good for much, but NICE).

Posted by: Cla68

If IronDuke would read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Activist#Hostility, he might notice that it describes the very behavior he is engaging in as one of the marks of an activist editor.

Posted by: Tarc

The Middle East conflict is fought with many weapons; propaganda is as much a tool of war as the soldiers and jihadists are. These clowns think they are fighting the good fight right alongside their real-life counterparts; to them, the openness of a wiki is just a platform to ensure their preferred version of reality is the one that is on display for the world.

And yes, all they do is either lie low when the heat gets turned up too high, or come back as brand-new accounts when the finally get scorched for good. "Wikifan12345" for example is most certainly a returned banned user.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

...who also has an account at the Review. Perhaps Wikifan would care to respond.

Posted by: EricBarbour

But seriously, folks.....that Cptnono (T-C-L-K-R-D) creature is a real freak-show. (A "new" one, anyway. If that isn't a sock, I mean. Which it probably is.)

Posted by: Tarc

You expect honesty from these vermin? Please... I first thought it was Zeq (T-H-L-K-D), who was banned about a month before 12345's creation, but ol Zeq's grammar was atrocious.

Posted by: Cla68

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2010/Candidates/PhilKnight/Questions#Questions_from_IronDuke (see also http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Elonka&diff=prev&oldid=399051357) of IronDuke engaging in activist behavior by trying to bully an admin who took actions that IronDuke disapproves of. The CC activists did the same thing to Lar before several of them were topic banned. Attempting to bully or intimidate administrators is one of the signs of an editor with a POV agenda.

Posted by: gomi

The shameful thing is that IronDuke didn't get topic-banned from Israel-Palestine articles when the rest of that crew, including Jayjg, did. That said, he's just as biased and hostile on other topics, so it's not clear that it would have in any way improved things.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

Which is puzzling, because he seems a lot more thuggish and heavy-handed than, for example, Jayjg, who would be more apt to couch his threats and insults in Wikipedia bureaucratese in order to evade the civility police.

Posted by: Cla68

IronDuke's over-the-top hostile approach actually reminds me of Mantanmoreland. Saying stuff like, "Cla68 has been repeatedly warned by admins to stop the behavior yet persists" or "Cla68 has been warned to stop meatpuppeting on behalf of a banned user" are exactly the same kind of things Mantanmoreland used to say. I suspect that if IronDuke ever was actually sanctioned, he would do the same thing as Mantan...wait a few months then start a new account(s) and get right back to it.

Posted by: BelovedFox

Well.. that's what most heavily involved users do. They flame out and come back... if they left under a block it's just by another name.

Posted by: Lar

That's not a reason to not sanction bad users though.

Posted by: gomi

I think it is fairly certain that this has already happened. Note Cloud Connection (T-C-L-K-R-D) and others I have forgotten now. He abandons them quickly and generally gets off without repercussion when caught.

Posted by: Milton Roe

I'm not above not NOT sanctioning bad users, especially if they're into guerilla threater grade double-negatives that are not unlikely to be used just as much to cause disruption, as not.

Lookie, Lar, you know as well as I do that the most perma-banned people on WP are perma-banned for political reasons. Jimbo or some cabalist or cabalista didn't like them and their ideas, so they were banned (supposedly) entirely from WP, rather than topic-banning them (or--horrors--debating them).

Irony: none of this ever works. If a user is smart enough to be totally site banned for being a troll, they're smart enough to get back on, as an impossible-to-catch sock (and many have done so). So whatever is the point of banning them in the first place? Blocking accounts and sprotecting articles works on simple vandals who are simple vandals because they are too unsophisticated, or simply too stupid, to be real trolls or propagandists or single-issue editos or whatever. It doesn't work at all for the actual trolls and single-mad POV pushers, as I think has been demonstrated again and again. Those people must be dealt with by ignoring or reverting them on the issues, but not blocking them unless they descend to actual clear-vandalism.

I work on articles where half the edits are stuff like "faarts smell like poopp." Cluebot only catches half this stuff-- the rest takes time from the scientists and professionals trying to edit in that environment. If the article was merely sprotected at some level, and (if necessary) the vandal-only schoolkid accounts were blocked automatically for rapidly increasing lengths of time, we'd have a lot more eyes for the bigger more difficult (adult) issues. I sometimes suspect that keeping people busy reverting junior high jokes, is an actual WP policy aimed at keeping people from thinking harder about the core issues on WP. But now I repeat myself, since I'm been saying this on WR for years, and so have others. I'm just annoyed because you're repeating YOURSELF.

IronDuke was frothing the other day that Cla68 might be putting up thoughts from two users permabanned 4 years ago. How many GRAWPs and other vandals have come and gone, since HerschelKrustovsky and Gnetworker and WordBomb had the temerity to mock SlimVirgin? And yet, here we are. It's not about the quality of the encyclopedia. Very clearly, it's not about the encyclopedia! So, stop pretending that it is.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

May I suggest an answer to that question? The point is so that the admin that is OWNing a given group of articles can enforce the house POV there, by asserting that any new editor who contravenes said POV is a sock- or meatpuppet of a banned user (see http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20100614/the-duck-test/.) Lar, you were falsely accused of misusing admin powerz in a content dispute. You must know that there are many admins who could be justifiably accused of doing the same, but are not.

Posted by: Lar

Well, ya.

Miltie, we all repeat ourselves here. It's what we do.

Posted by: It's the blimp, Frank

He just got hit with a http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&oldid=400170654#Wikifan12345. "No more mister nice guy" was arguing loudly in his defense.

Posted by: gomi

Meh. Three-month topic ban. Epeefleche (T-C-L-K-R-D) is curerntly -- and no doubt temporarily -- indef'd over canvassing on Judaica AFDs. IronDuck also weighed in on that one.

Posted by: Wikifan

Yeah, what banned user?

Editors who claim they are victim to a pro-Israel conspiracy tend file and complain the most at AN/I, AE, BLP, and all the other enforcement board.

Many users put more time and effort trying to remove editors they don't like than actually contributing content to Wikipedia.

Posted by: Tarc

I dunno, we'd have to think of what wiki-warriors haven't been seen in the last year or so, those that may not be necessarily banned but didn't want the baggage of their old accounts. 6SJ7, Yahel Guhan (formerly the illustrious Sefringle), and Humus Sapiens come to mind.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

Look how suavely Jayjg comports himself at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Jewish heavy metal musicians, which is otherwise comedy gold.

Posted by: Zoloft

So... not a banned user then? Interesting change of tack there, Tac.

Posted by: Wikifan

Do you have a life outside of wikipedia? First you say I'm a banned user and then say I'm an alias of those accounts above?

Good luck finding a shred of evidence to support the accusations.

Posted by: nableezy

I very much doubt that WF is any of these editors. I would not be surprised if this were his first account, though Im not sure if his claimed age is accurate. If it is I think he would be wise to find something else to do with his free time. Girls, weed, all of the above, just not this.

Posted by: Tarc

The lack of an actual denial is quite telling.

Posted by: Wikifan

I guess baseless accusations work well in noticeboards if you cry loud enough but you'll never find evidence suggesting I am an alias of a former account.

You know why? Because this is my only account. I'm not afraid of what editors think of me unlike some people here who use alias to hide their true identity. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if there some admins in this forum.

Posted by: Lar

This is true. And it's an unfortunate thing about noticeboards. Many baseless accusations are lodged here and many people get targeted...

...but

... the latter part seems a bit... off to me. My identity here and on WP are clearly linked. Further, my real name is Larry Pieniazek and I can prove it. What's your real name?... if you don't answer, you're using an alias to hide your true identity (and thus, talking out your @$$). That's OK if you don't answer, it's how things are structured at WP and here, but don't go on and on about aliases, please.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

My personal favorite is AN/I.

Posted by: Wikifan

I mean using an alias to game wikipedia. If I were to disclose my real name it wouldn't make my presence on wikipedia more legitimate.

I was referring to the issue where warriors hunt and stalk other editors on wikipedia mainspace, baiting users and sending them to enforcement boards when the time is right, and then offline they show their true feelings under a false name.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

And he's filthy rich...and http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=1126&bih=634&q=%22larry+pieniazek%22+millionaire&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=CqBz2ikT8TL-0KaW4iwPHq8jrAQAAAKoEBU_Qbf4V can prove it!

Posted by: Lar

Filthy? Maybe. Rich? Hardly! Do you know how much horses actually cost to keep? And Roxie's still in the hospital almost a week on.

Old joke:

Q: How to make a small fortune in the horse business?

A: Start with a large one.


But you can prove ANYTHING with Google.



Certainly it would. You'd have a real life reputation at stake instead of just your warrior cred. I repeat, you seem to be talking out your...

Posted by: thekohser

Why is this thread outside of The Annex?

Posted by: gomi

The topic needs to be split and cleaned, but I'm too busy right now to take it on.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

Done. Now my hands smell like caviar.

Posted by: Milton Roe

My favorite stuff!

Blows my load!


Milton Roe

Posted by: gomi

OK, now Lar (T-C-L-K-R-D) gets the http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:IronDuke&diff=prev&oldid=401365126 from IronDuke. He posts, apropos of IronDuke's accusation of Cla's "meatpuppetry":

ID summarily deletes the post, with the edit summary:

Question: Is this POV-pushing troll really being defended by ArbCom, or is this just bluster? Neitehr answer would be surprising, but it's always amusing to see how low Arbcom will sink.

Posted by: Cla68

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AIronDuke&action=historysubmit&diff=401455423&oldid=401449014

Posted by: Milton Roe

Okay, I'll bite. I'd be curious as to what "ArbCom" would say about this rather incredible charge. I mean, what the hell have either of these two users have to say after 4 years of banniation, that Cla68 would still be repeating? Lyndon Larouche views, maybe?

Inquiring minds want to know. I'll bet it's the idea that SlimVirgin is evil, which Cla68 has actually sort of implied, over the years. But one doesn't have to know either HK or Gnet to figure that out for oneself. Trust me.

Posted by: EricBarbour

As long as Lar feels the need to make ID's talkpage smell pretty....
what about http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:IronDuke&diff=396643962&oldid=396626116?

Lar, do you realize that this "cleanup" will just make ID crazier?

Posted by: Lar

I am certain that you are incorrect. My faith in human nature remains unbowed.

ID is, I am sure, a reasonable and sane editor who will do the right thing as we all endeavor to keep WP a civil and friendly environment. Ball is in ArbCom's court. If they answer in the affirmative I will be delighted to restore the material, with an apology. If they answer in the negative, or if they don't answer at all, it needs to stay out...

As for other items on his page, not my primary concern. This is the particular one that caught my eye.

Posted by: Cla68

Or we could ask for an ArbCom clarification, under the justification that IronDuke says that it is currently under ArbCom juristicdiction, and let IronDuke try to explain exactly why he's invoking arbcom's name as a reason for putting a personal attack on his talk page. I'm sure the new arbitrators would enjoy having a test case to start enjoying what it feels like being an uber-admin.

Posted by: gomi

It looks as though IronDuke has gone to ground again, after Lar pulled on his beard. How long will he disappear for this time?

Any response from Arbcom, Lar?

Posted by: Lar

No. I even checked my spam folder and everything.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

Lar, you've been rather frisky lately, facing down both IronDuck and Will Beback in the span of one week.

Posted by: Gruntled

Frisky, is he? Maybe he's been dosing himself on the stuff he gives his horses before they compete.

Posted by: gomi

[Modnote: the discussion of beards has been moved to http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=31778&hl= - gomi]

Posted by: Heat

Just as an aside, Mantanmoreland is quite a name to choose give that the actual Mantan Moreland is remembered for his stereotypical portrayal of blacks in film. Might as well have called himself Stepinfetchit or Uncletom or even Pickaninny. It's only because Mantan Moreland is largely forgotten today (unless you saw Spike Lee's "Bamboozled") that the username wasn't banned for insensitivity reasons.

Posted by: Infomercial

It's strange that Lar hasn't gotten word from ArbCom or IronDuke. Perhaps they're mutually keeping quiet to prevent further debate. However, IronDuke hasn't done a thing, a literal thing, since Lar removed the section. I presume he's just laying low until it all blows over. He may just sneak it back in when he's sure no one's looking. Unfortunately, I don't know how he works that way, so his motives may be less calculated than that.

Posted by: Heat

Um, it is Christmas and all that.

Posted by: Milton Roe

Yeah. IronDuke spent all day in mass.

Posted by: gomi

IronDuke (T-C-L-K-R-D) has a history of repeated disappearances, every time he comes under negative scrutiny. This behaviour is patterned on his mentor, Jayjg (T-C-L-K-R-D) , and is aimed toward long-term biasing of Wikipedia, not the cheap hit-and-run vandalism so common among others. After Cla68 called him out earlier this year, he disappeared for months, only to come back and post the message that led to this thread. With a lack of continuity in the short attention spans of the wiki-powerful, he can get away with almost anything.

Posted by: Heat

As I recall, this caught up with Jayjg in the end (though it took longer and the punishment was probably less severe than had he not engaged in hit and run tactics). Has there been an RFA against IronDuke? Hiding tends to be counterproductive in those cases.

Posted by: gomi

IronDuke (T-C-L-K-R-D) is back, after a month's hiatus, with http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alan_Dershowitz&diff=prev&oldid=406980663 (and 8 more), judging the coast to be clear following the lifting of restrictions on Jayjg (T-C-L-K-R-D) 's editing.

No reaction to Lar's poke or Cla68 ... yet.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

Mod's note: fans of Kwork's fracas may proceed to http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=32153&st=0&#entry264544.

Posted by: Milton Roe

I myself am not a fan of Kwork's fracas, if it's what I think it is, and I hope he keeps it covered in public. I did hear about a woman once who was actually shot in the fracas. It must be close to the yet, because the same article said the bullet was in her yet. Presumably having traversed the fracas.

Posted by: CharlotteWebb

Y en México soviético, tú fracasas.

Posted by: Zoloft

As my people say, "A palabras necias, oidos sordos."

At least my people down at http://www.yelp.com/biz/las-cuatro-milpas-san-diego.

Posted by: gomi

IronDuke (T-C-L-K-R-D) is back from his self-imposed exile of three months.

His first actions, somewhat predictably, were to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:IronDuke&diff=prev&oldid=428097689, which had been deleted by Lar, followed by http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cla68&oldid=428872252#I.27m_back to stir the pot with him and ask him "formally" to ... I dunno.

IronDuke's opening salvo with Cla, hilariously, is http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACla68&action=historysubmit&diff=428098196&oldid=427682243:

"Pending resolution of your actions" and "per discussion with arbcom members" -- its so precious. Especially since there is no resolution, and no arbcom members have come forward to be named or make any comment whatsoever.

Will IronDuke settle into his usual pattern of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ulysses_S._Grant&action=historysubmit&diff=428522414&oldid=427426738, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AKosher_tax_%28antisemitic_canard%29&action=historysubmit&diff=429252730&oldid=428554033, and general mayhem? Only time will tell.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

Lar -- Guys want to be like him. Girls want to be with him. Some guys also want to be with him, but I don't know if he's into that.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

That "resolved" template is just so precious. Also, IronDuck's faithful companion, Bill Huffman, is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bill_Huffman One might see why he charges Cla68 with being "disruptive."

Posted by: Cla68

So, now there is a huge section in the Grant article on anti-semitism. At least he didn't try to add mention of it to the lede. Which reminds me, perhaps it's time again to try to get the Nazi reference removed from the lede of the Martin Luther article. Hopefully IronDuke, if he is now reformed and reborn as a neutral editor, will help me out with that.

Postscript: The Nazis aren't mentioned in the Luther intro anymore, although his anti-semitism still is.

Posted by: gomi

That's next. He's patient. He'll wait a few months, revert-warring over his section, then add it to the lede, citing "long-standing consensus". I can also predict that if you revert him, you'll be "stalking" him at the behest of "banned editors" -- meatpuppetry again! Don't do it, Cla!
Pull my other one.