Don Murphy brings the Apocalypse! Options

[carbuncle]

After User:Erik added a picture to Don Murphy, the following note appeared on his talk page:

Don Murphy Photo
Dear Erik

Cropping a photo does not make it a derivative work. You do not have the copyright to that photo you inserted. You can avoid personal litigation by removing it within 48 hours. The Foundation cannot avoid it. Thank you. SharkJumper 15:44, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Enjoy WP while you still can!

Never mind - Apocalypse cancelled.

[Tarc]

Man, I just happened to comment on this over there a moment ago. Am I being stalked? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/fear.gif)

The image itself is shit, and I'm not really clear on how an image from someone flickr stream gets licensed CC in the first place.

[Milton Roe]

After User:Erik added a picture to Don Murphy, the following note appeared on his talk page:

Don Murphy Photo
Dear Erik

Cropping a photo does not make it a derivative work. You do not have the copyright to that photo you inserted. You can avoid personal litigation by removing it within 48 hours. The Foundation cannot avoid it. Thank you. SharkJumper 15:44, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Enjoy WP while you still can!

Never mind - Apocalypse cancelled.

Amazing that SharkJumper (T-C-L-K-R-D) didn't get zapped for WP:NLT violation.

[edit] Wups. On going to his page I see that's exactly what happened. Plus, he was a Murphy sock, of course.

[carbuncle]

Apocalypse possibly back on if Don Murphy doesn't have a stroke while furiously yet impotently pounding his keyboard:

Making legal threats

There's a quite serious policy at the Wikipedia (seen at WP:NLT about threatening legal action, as you did here. You really need to go retract that immediately before it gets you into trouble. If there's issues with copyrighted material, then there are better ways ways of dealing with that. Since the file itself is hosted at the Wikipedia Commons, I'd think you'd have to pursue it there. Tarc (talk) 16:02, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Get me into trouble? Hah. Bringing the curtain down more like! SharkJumper (talk) 19:11, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I have just reported you for your legal threat, as indicated above. The original image was released under CC licensing, and it is acceptable to have a derivative image based on a CC licensed image. Erik (talk | contribs) 16:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh I better call my fucking mommy you stupid prick. Who is going to pay your legal bill? I just allocated $10,000 of Transformers money just to sue you to set a precedent. So report away. Bass and Wales ain't gonna help you little boy. http://www.donmurphy.net/board/showthread.php?t=33622 SharkJumper (talk) 19:10, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

[Ottava]

Did everyone forget that a NLT block is ended as soon as the threat is over? And seeing as how the image is removed there is no more threat?

[carbuncle]

Did everyone forget that a NLT block is ended as soon as the threat is over? And seeing as how the image is removed there is no more threat?

I think Murphy's past threats and harassment of various people have resulted in him being permabanned. (IMG:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Don_Murphy.jpg)
And his monkey, too.

[Somey]

And his monkey, too.

Bastards! That isn't even his monkey!

These people will just ban anyone (or any monkey) they please, not caring about the wide-ranging implications of banning innocent monkeys without anything even approaching just cause.

So, who's been watching the NFL draft?

[Ottava]

And his monkey, too.

Bastards! That isn't even his monkey!

These people will just ban anyone (or any monkey) they please, not caring about the wide-ranging implications of banning innocent monkeys without anything even approaching just cause.

So, who's been watching the NFL draft?

I was, and everyone was pissed off when after waiting so long only for the Ravens to give up their late 1st round draft pick so there was no pick for them last night.

[Somey]

I was, and everyone was pissed off when after waiting so long only for the Ravens to give up their late 1st round draft pick so there was no pick for them last night.

True, but it was the smart move. Most people seem to agree that after the first 15 picks, the talent level is likely to be pretty consistent for the next hundred or so. Besides, if there's no lockout next year, there's probably going to be a LOT of unrestricted free agents. That means this is the year to trade down in the draft for more late-round picks - 2011 picks in general are likely to have less value trade-wise, if that's actually what happens.

Funny, I wouldn't have expected you to be interested in that sort of thing! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

[Ottava]

I was, and everyone was pissed off when after waiting so long only for the Ravens to give up their late 1st round draft pick so there was no pick for them last night.

True, but it was the smart move. Most people seem to agree that after the first 15 picks, the talent level is likely to be pretty consistent for the next hundred or so. Besides, if there's no lockout next year, there's probably going to be a LOT of unrestricted free agents. That means this is the year to trade down in the draft for more late-round picks - 2011 picks in general are likely to have less value trade-wise, if that's actually what happens.

Funny, I wouldn't have expected you to be interested in that sort of thing! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

At the DC Meetup, I was the only one to be watching the Jets woop up on the Bengals. Baltimore is a football town. I am glad to have a strong alternative to the team I was forced to embrace when I was small (the team formerly led by Mr touchy grabby in the nightclub).

[Somey]

At the DC Meetup, I was the only one to be watching the Jets woop up on the Bengals. Baltimore is a football town. I am glad to have a strong alternative to the team I was forced to embrace when I was small (the team formerly led by Mr touchy grabby in the nightclub).

Formerly? I thought they said they weren't going to trade him.

Maybe I should become a Ravens fan too - that might be better than waiting for Dan Snyder to finally grow up and have a heart attack, so that someone competent can take over.

[victim of censorship]

Did everyone forget that a NLT block is ended as soon as the threat is over? And seeing as how the image is removed there is no more threat?

I think Murphy's past threats and harassment of various people have resulted in him being permabanned. (IMG:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Don_Murphy.jpg)
And his monkey, too.

I think the monkey looks a like a typical Wikpediot administrator at a Meetup

[Ottava]

At the DC Meetup, I was the only one to be watching the Jets woop up on the Bengals. Baltimore is a football town. I am glad to have a strong alternative to the team I was forced to embrace when I was small (the team formerly led by Mr touchy grabby in the nightclub).

Formerly? I thought they said they weren't going to trade him.

Maybe I should become a Ravens fan too - that might be better than waiting for Dan Snyder to finally grow up and have a heart attack, so that someone competent can take over.

Well, one can only hope about Rottensberg.

What makes the Ravens great is that they always have a nasty season, always have interesting games (no real blow outs unless they are unexpected), and the calls are always exciting because they can be ridiculous.

The Redskins... sigh. They are like the Baltimore Orioles - once had some decent players but kept losing them to injuries or trading them off on bad deals. Then when it all fell apart, the team got use to losing and couldn't get out of its hole.

I think the monkey looks a like a typical Wikpediot administrator at a Meetup

The monkey is probably a better article writer. Remember, when given enough time the monkey will write Shakespeare.

[Somey]

I think the monkey looks a like a typical Wikpediot administrator at a Meetup

Come on - don't be so insulting to monkeys! Besides, if there were any real similarity there, Murphy would be punching the monkey in the face, not shaking his hand.

That brings up an interesting question - can you shake hands with a vole? I'd have to say you probably can shake hands with a mole, since they have those big front paws for digging, but a vole... they don't have the big front paws.

[Milton Roe]

I think the monkey looks a like a typical Wikpediot administrator at a Meetup

Come on - don't be so insulting to monkeys! Besides, if there were any real similarity there, Murphy would be punching the monkey in the face, not shaking his hand.

That brings up an interesting question - can you shake hands with a vole? I'd have to say you probably can shake hands with a mole, since they have those big front paws for digging, but a vole... they don't have the big front paws.

Take the paw gently between two curled fingers, using the volar surface of the hand.

Ask me anything. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

[EricBarbour]

Gad. What a nerd....

No wonder he spends so much time writing about movies on WP.
No life at all.

I dream in XHTML, CSS, and jQuery, and I lovingly hand-code all my sites in Textmate.

[dtobias]

Murphy is just being a smelly lump of feces as usual. I checked on the status of the image, and the original Flickr posting was indeed released under a CC license permitting remixing/adaptation, so no copyrights were violated. Even if they were, the rights would belong to whoever took the picture, not to Murphy himself, so he would have no grounds to sue.

[GlassBeadGame]

Murphy is just being a smelly lump of feces as usual. I checked on the status of the image, and the original Flickr posting was indeed released under a CC license permitting remixing/adaptation, so no copyrights were violated. Even if they were, the rights would belong to whoever took the picture, not to Murphy himself, so he would have no grounds to sue.

Not if it was a work for hire.

[ColScott]

Murphy is just being a smelly lump of feces as usual. I checked on the status of the image, and the original Flickr posting was indeed released under a CC license permitting remixing/adaptation, so no copyrights were violated. Even if they were, the rights would belong to whoever took the picture, not to Murphy himself, so he would have no grounds to sue.

Not if it was a work for hire.

which it was so eat a bag dtobias.

My favorite part is that after speaking with Erik he is desperately trying to convince me that I have the wrong guy.

Except he is on vacation in the UK
and the phone rings a UK ring
and all of his edit times are UK
unless he started editing at 5 am on a Saturday in NY
which even with no life I doubt

(hey tobias, what did I ever do to you?)

so editor ERIK posted a photo to my article yesterday designed to make me look stupid
we managed to convince the cultists that it should not be posted and in fact are having it removed
this led to ERIK being outed on my website

ERIK then went and re-wrote the article
the same article that stood by minding its own business for 16 months.

He re-wrote it as an act of revenge to me
And he rewrote it to remove the link to donmurphy.net that would of course out his crybaby ass

I have questions for the cultists that lurk here

1- Why is rewriting an article for revenge okay? BLP: DO NO HARM is just an f-ing joke right?
2- Go and look at the archives for the article. It had been decided that linking to DM.net was okay because it was my official site. Attack site my ass it is a personal site for Transformers and movie fans. Do any of you have the chops to put it back where it belongs?
3- To quote a great general- Have you no shame? Why is Erik even allowed among you?

[Peter Damian]

Some messages from 'Erik Kraft' on User:Erik's page, from the IP 95.177.43.18 which is London registered. He claims to know nothing about Wikipedia and therefore not the Wikipedia editor user:Erik. Which is puzzling as he claims only to have heard of this in the last hour.

* How did he find User:Erik page on Wikipedia
* How did he know it was to do with Don Murphy, who only identified himself as 'Don'?
* How did he learn to indent with a colon and use three 's for bold type? Perhaps the colon he learned from the person who replied to his first message, but how the bold?
* How does he know what an 'edit war' is?

'''Erik Kraft here again. Sorry for not following the reply conventions, but I'm not a wikipedia editor and I feel this is rather urgent. Erik, can you clarify what you meant by "process of outing you." Because Don and his people seem to be taking this as evidence that I, Erik Kraft, am the person they are mad at. Don has posted my personal information, including address and phone number, on his forum on his personal site and I'm extremely disturbed. Thanks. '''
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Eri...mely_mad_at_you

[edit]
His second edit
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=358034400
also shows proficiency in the use of == for section headings.

[edit] Even more puzzling, user:Erik removes information from his user page

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=358006391

with the comment "Removed incriminating information to avoid harassment". The information is that he is "from Chicago, IL and am a graduate of University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign". Thus he attended the same university as Erik Kraft

http://www.restlessbee.com/pdfs/erik_kraft_resume.pdf

The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign // Visiting Assistant Librarian for Digital Resources / July 2005–June 2006 // Graduate Assistant and Web Designer / January 2004–August 2005

[edit] From Murphy's forum:

Clearly Don isn't going to be talked out of thinking I'm playing some game with him, but I hope everyone else realizes I'm dead serious and extremely disturbed. I'd like everyone to know that Don called me from a blocked number, and wouldn't tell me his last name or even identify the article he was so upset about. I've had to figure it out myself over the past two hours.
http://www.donmurphy.net/board/showthread.php?t=33622

How exactly did he figure this out? I.e. that it was Don Murphy, that the article was the problem, and so on.


This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[Theanima]

It's sad that Don Murphy got the name completely wrong and decided to ruin this completely innocent person's day by ringing them up. It clearly upset them.

I did a bit of my own research and have found what User:Erik's real name is more likely to be. How they came up with Erik Kraft, I don't know.

[Somey]

I know I've said this before, but it bears repeating:

Despite the success of the Transformers movies and Natural Born Killers, I just don't see how Mr. Murphy here could be said to have reached the kind of "household name" status that would necessitate Wikipedia's having an article about him. Maybe if he were a bit more of a self-promoter, or had some hit TV-series credits, he'd be there with folks like Jerry Bruckheimer or Stephen Bochco, whom everybody's pretty much heard of. But I'm pretty sure I could name several guys with longer (and possibly more impressive) resumes who don't have WP articles. Let's face it, the reason Don Murphy is in Wikipedia is because Wikipedia is full of kids who grew up playing with Transformers action figures, and one or two of them probably didn't like it when their suggestions for what to do on the first movie were rejected. That's it, that's the entirety of it right there. It's one of the stupidest reasons for starting a WP article I know of (though I'm sure there's plenty worse out there that just haven't come to my attention).

When are they going to just delete the article? How many people with the same name(s) as some lame-brained WP "editor" (sheez, "Erik Kraft" probably isn't even his real name!) are going to have to suffer because Wikipedians can't keep it in their pants?

And it's not just real-name accounts, either - for example, if the Murphy article were under attack by User:Can't Sleep, Clown Will Eat Me, just imagine how many people who actually are insomniacs due to fear of circus clowns would suffer? Or if the person was User:Kiss Me Ladies, I'm the Cavalry - just think of all the heterosexual horsemen wearing military uniforms would suddenly be under attack by messageboard "goons" for no apparent logical reason? And don't even ask what would happen if it were User:Everybody Everywhere...

The people insisting that this article be kept are, quite simply, morons. I'll bet a group of organ-grinder monkeys would do a vastly better job of managing the content on Wikipedia, if this is the best the existing regime can do.

[Theanima]

I know I've said this before, but it bears repeating:

Despite the success of the Transformers movies and Natural Born Killers, I just don't see how Mr. Murphy here could be said to have reached the kind of "household name" status that would necessitate Wikipedia's having an article about him. Maybe if he were a bit more of a self-promoter, or had some hit TV-series credits, he'd be there with folks like Jerry Bruckheimer or Stephen Bochco, whom everybody's pretty much heard of. But I'm pretty sure I could name several guys with longer (and possibly more impressive) resumes who don't have WP articles. Let's face it, the reason Don Murphy is in Wikipedia is because Wikipedia is full of kids who grew up playing with Transformers action figures, and one or two of them probably didn't like it when their suggestions for what to do on the first movie were rejected. That's it, that's the entirety of it right there. It's one of the stupidest reasons for starting a WP article I know of (though I'm sure there's plenty worse out there that just haven't come to my attention).

When are they going to just delete the article? How many people with the same name(s) as some lame-brained WP "editor" (sheez, "Erik Kraft" probably isn't even his real name!) are going to have to suffer because Wikipedians can't keep it in their pants?

And it's not just real-name accounts, either - for example, if the Murphy article were under attack by User:Can't Sleep, Clown Will Eat Me, just imagine how many people who actually are insomniacs due to fear of circus clowns would suffer? Or if the person was User:Kiss Me Ladies, I'm the Cavalry - just think of all the heterosexual horsemen wearing military uniforms would suddenly be under attack by messageboard "goons" for no apparent logical reason? And don't even ask what would happen if it were User:Everybody Everywhere...

The people insisting that this article be kept are, quite simply, morons. I'll bet a group of organ-grinder monkeys would do a vastly better job of managing the content on Wikipedia, if this is the best the existing regime can do.

Encyclopedias do not need to just be about "household names". As it happens I've never heard of either the people you just mentioned about. If one goes into an industry such as the one Murphy is in, it's inevitable one will become notable.

It's not like he is a minor backstage guy - he has produced nearly a dozen notable films. You can't expect to be treated as if you're a nobody if you're a film producer.

[Somey]

It's not like he is a minor backstage guy - he has produced nearly a dozen notable films. You can't expect to be treated as if you're a nobody if you're a film producer.

"Nobody"? Who is saying he should be treated like a "nobody"? Are you saying everyone who doesn't have a Wikipedia article is a "nobody"?

What Wikipedians want, and how they personally wish to "treat" people, shouldn't be the issue here. The issues should be privacy, fairness, and responsibility in the face of defamation and revenge. None of which Wikipedians are interested in having.

[Milton Roe]

Encyclopedias do not need to just be about "household names".

Ones that are editable by anybody should be about ANY names, unless the person is dead. Otherwise, you make every person who has done anything very positive with their lives at all that gets them noticed by "media" pay a penalty of having to watch their Wiki very day do be sure it doesn't slander them. That really sucks, and it's hard to believe you defend the idea.

Now, don't come back and say "What about that politician who wants to put his name and face on everything from my neighbor's front lawn to every other TV ad?" And the answer is:

"Maybe-- but there's no good way to draw the line between that person and anybody else who didn't seek notariety for its own sake, but rather found it thrust upon them, without 'asking for it.'"

[BelovedFox]

It's not like he is a minor backstage guy - he has produced nearly a dozen notable films. You can't expect to be treated as if you're a nobody if you're a film producer.

"Nobody"? Who is saying he should be treated like a "nobody"? Are you saying everyone who doesn't have a Wikipedia article is a "nobody"?

What Wikipedians want, and how they personally wish to "treat" people, shouldn't be the issue here. The issues should be privacy, fairness, and responsibility in the face of defamation and revenge. None of which Wikipedians are interested in having.

Anima has a point, in that what consistutes a "household name" should never be used as a criterion for inclusion.

I can name a dozen or two visual effects/directors, for example, who have worked on dozens of AAA films, collaborated with/were employed by Industrial Light & Magic, et al. They've gotten Oscar nods and awards for their work. These people are pretty big names in the entertainment industry--but of course no average moviegoer is going to stick around to find out who Scott Farrar is (and that IMDB link is great because it's missing three movies I know of from his credits).

You, of course, have a point as well--in that provoking a singularly unpleasant individual with acolytes who will harass people in real life by keeping an article on him isn't exactly good for business or a productive work environment. It's not like a lot of people besides him care.[1]

[Doc glasgow]

Encyclopedias do not need to just be about "household names".

Ones that are editable by anybody should be about ANY names, unless the person is dead. Otherwise, you make every person who has done anything very positive with their lives at all that gets them noticed by "media" pay a penalty of having to watch their Wiki very day do be sure it doesn't slander them. That really sucks, and it's hard to believe you defend the idea.

Now, don't come back and say "What about that politician who wants to put his name and face on everything from my neighbor's front lawn to every other TV ad?" And the answer is: "Maybe, but there's no good way to draw the line between that person and anybody else who didn't seek notariety for its own sake, but found it thrust upon them without them "asking for it."

The "where do we draw the line" argument is totally spurious. Sure, no line will be cut and dry, but Wikipedia's existing inclusion standards are subjective and inconsistent anyway.

It would not be hard to have a general "opt out", but then exclude the A-list politician from that right.

However, personally, I think lifting the inclusion bar to delete at least 50% of current BLPs would probably be a better way to go.

I'd afd Murphy's bio in a flash, if I thought I could succeed. Unfortunately it would only result in my having to do more of this

[LessHorrid vanU]

The person who needs a WP article is the photographer that could make Don Murphy look good - from the photo used here - and I am finding it hilarious that the image Don/Col would very much prefer not to have adorning the WP article on him is one that he (per this very discussion) paid to have taken, and is otherwise available in the hinderwebs...

[Tarc]

Encyclopedias do not need to just be about "household names". As it happens I've never heard of either the people you just mentioned about. If one goes into an industry such as the one Murphy is in, it's inevitable one will become notable.

It's not like he is a minor backstage guy - he has produced nearly a dozen notable films. You can't expect to be treated as if you're a nobody if you're a film producer.

Watch "Get Shorty" sometime. Film producers don't do all that much. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

I'm half-tempted to take this thing to an AfD and have it out.

[Peter Damian]

It's sad that Don Murphy got the name completely wrong and decided to ruin this completely innocent person's day by ringing them up. It clearly upset them.

I did a bit of my own research and have found what User:Erik's real name is more likely to be. How they came up with Erik Kraft, I don't know.

The evidence points to the person not being completely innocent at all. Per my comment here

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&sh...ndpost&p=232876

Why would 'User Erik' remove from his user page the information about his university at exactly the time Erik Kraft was phoned by Murphy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=358006391

You will object that Erik Kraft immediately got in touch with User:Erik to tell him to remove it. But if Erik Kraft knew nothing about user:Erik, how was that? All the evidence points to Mr Kraft as being entirely guilty.

And now user:Erik has a sock: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Erik.kraft

Oh man Erik, I really appreciate it. This has been such a bizarre and scary episode, but it's good to know that the decent people here seem to far outnumber the trolls. It's truly unbelievable to go through this guy's message board and see how he sics his anonymous thugs on people for the slightest perceived offenses. Erik.kraft (talk) 19:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm grateful to you for doing this--and I've gone ahead and created a wikipedia account (erik.kraft) so that it doesn't seem like I'm trying to hide behind anonymity. Which is clearly not possible anyway. Feel free to refer to me as erik.kraft going forward. I'll be following the ANI page and will post further details as I have them. And I even just learned to sign my posts: --> Erik.kraft (talk) 19:06, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=358061671

This is laughable.

[edit] Even more laughs

::It's not that funny to be outed, guys... in any case, I will be working on his article. If someone like Tarc does not see Murphy's notability in his article, then the producer has successfully exerted control over it. First off, I removed his website, which is an attack site. To re-cite his background, I found [http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/queens/2009/10/20/2009-10-20_producer_transforms.html this], which further solidifies Murphy's notability. I am not sure if I will be further harassed, so I hope admins will keep an eye on the article as I bring my expertise to it. [[User:Erik|Erik]] ([[User talk:Erik|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Erik|contribs]]) 10:41, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
+
+ ::: Erik, this is Erik Kraft. Can you explain what you mean by "outed"? Because as far as I can tell it was me who was "outed" and you are still anonymous. You used the same language on your now-deleted Talk page and this was part of the reason why Don was convinced I was you. I feel like I'm through the looking glass here. [[User:Erik.kraft|Erik.kraft]] ([[User talk:Erik.kraft|talk]]) 21:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Talking to himself. (Note the time difference. He gets called by Murphy, and complains as User:Erik that he has been outed. Then he complains, as the Erik Kraft, that he has been outed. Then the penny drops.)

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[Daniel Brandt]

Murphy got the wrong Erik. I don't have the dox on the right Erik, but I have evidence that it is not Erik Kraft in Chicago.

Veromi.net and zabasearch.com show that Erik A. Kraft in Chicago is 33 years old. This is the same Erik Kraft suspected by Murphy, as proven by the registration on erikkraft.info, which is his domain on his résumé, the same one that is linked on Murphy's forum. One of the zabasearch.com entries for him shows that he once lived at the same address as the one listed in WHOIS for the erikkraft.info domain. That's Erik Kraft.

But the Erik that Murphy really wants once added his age and birthday on a user page in 2006. He said his birthday is December 31 and he is 20 years old. That would mean his birthdate is 1985-12-31, turning 21 at the end of 2006. Today he would be 24 years old. Moreover, that same page says that he was born in Chicago, but there isn't any evidence I've seen that he lives in Chicago.

The User:Erik that Murphy wants is nine years younger than Erik A. Kraft in Chicago.

[Peter Damian]

Murphy got the wrong Erik. I don't have the dox on the right Erik, but I have evidence that it is not Erik Kraft in Chicago.

Veromi.net and zabasearch.com show that Erik A. Kraft in Chicago is 33 years old. This is the same Erik Kraft suspected by Murphy, as proven by the registration on erikkraft.info, which is his domain on his résumé, the same one that is linked on Murphy's forum. One of the zabasearch.com entries for him shows that he once lived at the same address as the one listed in WHOIS for the erikkraft.info domain. That's Erik Kraft.

But the Erik that Murphy really wants once added his age and birthday on a user page in 2006. He said his birthday is December 31 and he is 20 years old. That would mean his birthdate is 1985-12-31, turning 21 at the end of 2006. Today he would be 24 years old. Moreover, that same page says that he was born in Chicago, but there isn't any evidence I've seen that he lives in Chicago.

The User:Erik that Murphy wants is nine years younger than Erik A. Kraft in Chicago.

Then why does user:Erik remove the reference to being at The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, shortly after Erik Kraft is called by Murphy? Makes no sense.

[edit] They both attended Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 2006. Erik Kraft as a mature student, age about 29, user:Erik who says he was 20. Was his statement on the user page correct?

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[BelovedFox]

Murphy got the wrong Erik. I don't have the dox on the right Erik, but I have evidence that it is not Erik Kraft in Chicago.

Veromi.net and zabasearch.com show that Erik A. Kraft in Chicago is 33 years old. This is the same Erik Kraft suspected by Murphy, as proven by the registration on erikkraft.info, which is his domain on his résumé, the same one that is linked on Murphy's forum. One of the zabasearch.com entries for him shows that he once lived at the same address as the one listed in WHOIS for the erikkraft.info domain. That's Erik Kraft.

But the Erik that Murphy really wants once added his age and birthday on a user page in 2006. He said his birthday is December 31 and he is 20 years old. That would mean his birthdate is 1985-12-31, turning 21 at the end of 2006. Today he would be 24 years old. Moreover, that same page says that he was born in Chicago, but there isn't any evidence I've seen that he lives in Chicago.

The User:Erik that Murphy wants is nine years younger than Erik A. Kraft in Chicago.

Do you know where the information for those sites is drawn from? Curious, I tried running myself through it, and only found that there's a bunch of elderly people with my exact name (and middle initial?) living right on top of me... no entry for myself, however.

Murphy got the wrong Erik. I don't have the dox on the right Erik, but I have evidence that it is not Erik Kraft in Chicago.

Veromi.net and zabasearch.com show that Erik A. Kraft in Chicago is 33 years old. This is the same Erik Kraft suspected by Murphy, as proven by the registration on erikkraft.info, which is his domain on his résumé, the same one that is linked on Murphy's forum. One of the zabasearch.com entries for him shows that he once lived at the same address as the one listed in WHOIS for the erikkraft.info domain. That's Erik Kraft.

But the Erik that Murphy really wants once added his age and birthday on a user page in 2006. He said his birthday is December 31 and he is 20 years old. That would mean his birthdate is 1985-12-31, turning 21 at the end of 2006. Today he would be 24 years old. Moreover, that same page says that he was born in Chicago, but there isn't any evidence I've seen that he lives in Chicago.

The User:Erik that Murphy wants is nine years younger than Erik A. Kraft in Chicago.

Then why does user:Erik remove the reference to being at The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, shortly after Erik Kraft is called by Murphy? Makes no sense.

[edit] They both attended Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 2006. Erik Kraft as a mature student, age about 29, user:Erik who says he was 20. Was his statement on the user page correct?

Erik presumably learned that Murphy was fishing for him on his forum, as he made an open request to "find Erik" before anyone turned up anything.

I don't see any reason to doubt Erik on his personal details (although now he well wishes he didn't post them.)

[Peter Damian]

Today he would be 24 years old. Moreover, that same page says that he was born in Chicago, but there isn't any evidence I've seen that he lives in Chicago.

When he made this edit

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=357881824

was when I suspect he left Illinois. I.e. now a graduate.

The User:Erik that Murphy wants is nine years younger than Erik A. Kraft in Chicago.

No they are the same age (33). User:Erik was lying about his age, obviously.

Erik presumably learned that Murphy was fishing for him on his forum, as he made an open request to "find Erik" before anyone turned up anything.

I don't see any reason to doubt Erik on his personal details (although now he well wishes he didn't post them.)

That i agree is plausible. How do you explain Erik Kraft's rapid understanding of Wikipedia editing protocol? How do you explain he found User:Erik's page without ColScott saying who he was?

[edit] Also note that user:Erik says he HAS been outed. (Not that he is afraid of being outed).

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[ColScott]

It's sad that Don Murphy got the name completely wrong and decided to ruin this completely innocent person's day by ringing them up. It clearly upset them.

I did a bit of my own research and have found what User:Erik's real name is more likely to be. How they came up with Erik Kraft, I don't know.

Except you're crazy.

Leaving aside all the evidence on this thread alone, I had already zeroed in on the use of the term EDIT WAR. There's just no way it's a separate guy. And he's editing on UK time.

I would love to hear the phone call to the police (as if)- Hi, this guy called me up and asked me why I was messing with his article. The guy was in LA, I live in Chicago but he reached me in the UK. I feel physically threatened please help me. Christ the desk sergeant would call for the net.

I also love the turds who are going to call Jimmy Wales. He's too busy cleaning his tee shirt cum stains, kiddo.

Theanima, prove me wrong by private msg. Which you won't.

[BelovedFox]

It's sad that Don Murphy got the name completely wrong and decided to ruin this completely innocent person's day by ringing them up. It clearly upset them.

I did a bit of my own research and have found what User:Erik's real name is more likely to be. How they came up with Erik Kraft, I don't know.

Except you're crazy.

Leaving aside all the evidence on this thread alone, I had already zeroed in on the use of the term EDIT WAR. There's just no way it's a separate guy. And he's editing on UK time.

I would love to hear the phone call to the police (as if)- Hi, this guy called me up and asked me why I was messing with his article. The guy was in LA, I live in Chicago but he reached me in the UK. I feel physically threatened please help me. Christ the desk sergeant would call for the net.

I also love the turds who are going to call Jimmy Wales. He's too busy cleaning his tee shirt cum stains, kiddo.

Theanima, prove me wrong by private msg. Which you won't.

I'd still love to hear why you commissioned an amazingly bad photograph of yourself, and what the evidence of this ownership is.

[ColScott]

It's sad that Don Murphy got the name completely wrong and decided to ruin this completely innocent person's day by ringing them up. It clearly upset them.

I did a bit of my own research and have found what User:Erik's real name is more likely to be. How they came up with Erik Kraft, I don't know.

Except you're crazy.

Leaving aside all the evidence on this thread alone, I had already zeroed in on the use of the term EDIT WAR. There's just no way it's a separate guy. And he's editing on UK time.

I would love to hear the phone call to the police (as if)- Hi, this guy called me up and asked me why I was messing with his article. The guy was in LA, I live in Chicago but he reached me in the UK. I feel physically threatened please help me. Christ the desk sergeant would call for the net.

I also love the turds who are going to call Jimmy Wales. He's too busy cleaning his tee shirt cum stains, kiddo.

Theanima, prove me wrong by private msg. Which you won't.

I'd still love to hear why you commissioned an amazingly bad photograph of yourself, and what the evidence of this ownership is.

I didn't. My partner at Meltdown Comics did. Neither of us had any idea it was on the net. We are having it removed now.

It's sad that Don Murphy got the name completely wrong and decided to ruin this completely innocent person's day by ringing them up. It clearly upset them.

I did a bit of my own research and have found what User:Erik's real name is more likely to be. How they came up with Erik Kraft, I don't know.

The evidence points to the person not being completely innocent at all. Per my comment here

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&sh...ndpost&p=232876

Why would 'User Erik' remove from his user page the information about his university at exactly the time Erik Kraft was phoned by Murphy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=358006391

You will object that Erik Kraft immediately got in touch with User:Erik to tell him to remove it. But if Erik Kraft knew nothing about user:Erik, how was that? All the evidence points to Mr Kraft as being entirely guilty.

And now user:Erik has a sock: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Erik.kraft

Oh man Erik, I really appreciate it. This has been such a bizarre and scary episode, but it's good to know that the decent people here seem to far outnumber the trolls. It's truly unbelievable to go through this guy's message board and see how he sics his anonymous thugs on people for the slightest perceived offenses. Erik.kraft (talk) 19:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm grateful to you for doing this--and I've gone ahead and created a wikipedia account (erik.kraft) so that it doesn't seem like I'm trying to hide behind anonymity. Which is clearly not possible anyway. Feel free to refer to me as erik.kraft going forward. I'll be following the ANI page and will post further details as I have them. And I even just learned to sign my posts: --> Erik.kraft (talk) 19:06, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=358061671

This is laughable.

[edit] Even more laughs

::It's not that funny to be outed, guys... in any case, I will be working on his article. If someone like Tarc does not see Murphy's notability in his article, then the producer has successfully exerted control over it. First off, I removed his website, which is an attack site. To re-cite his background, I found [http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/queens/2009/10/20/2009-10-20_producer_transforms.html this], which further solidifies Murphy's notability. I am not sure if I will be further harassed, so I hope admins will keep an eye on the article as I bring my expertise to it. [[User:Erik|Erik]] ([[User talk:Erik|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Erik|contribs]]) 10:41, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
+
+ ::: Erik, this is Erik Kraft. Can you explain what you mean by "outed"? Because as far as I can tell it was me who was "outed" and you are still anonymous. You used the same language on your now-deleted Talk page and this was part of the reason why Don was convinced I was you. I feel like I'm through the looking glass here. [[User:Erik.kraft|Erik.kraft]] ([[User talk:Erik.kraft|talk]]) 21:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Talking to himself. (Note the time difference. He gets called by Murphy, and complains as User:Erik that he has been outed. Then he complains, as the Erik Kraft, that he has been outed. Then the penny drops.)

God it just hit me like a ton of bricks. We are both being dumb AND blind. Sorry.

Editor Erik, after being outed on my site and admitting as much, then goes and spends HOURS re-writing the BLP of me specifically to REMOVE any mention of my website. He then goes to movies I have made like Transformers and removes all mentions of the website as an attack site (which it isn't). WHY IS HE SO CONCERNED ABOUT REMOVING MENTION OF MY WEBSITE except because it had his correct information on it?

He's the f-head.

[Ottava]

Transformers being a crappy movie is enough reason to justify an AfD of any article connected to it. The sequel was even worse. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

[ColScott]

Transformers being a crappy movie is enough reason to justify an AfD of any article connected to it. The sequel was even worse. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Yeah but seriously, how does it feel to work for a porn promoter? A man who uses you and laughs at your fat, stupid face? The two TFs have made me very rich. Has Wikipedia made you anything except more afraid of girls?

[Daniel Brandt]

No they are the same age (33). User:Erik was lying about his age, obviously.

Two different people, or User:Erik was lying in 2006 about his age.

The age 33 for Erik A. Kraft is solid; this comes from various public records. His exact birthday seems to be 1977-03-23. On his résumé he says "B.A., English, and B.A., Psychology, College of Letters and Science University of Wisconsin-Madison, December 1999." (You can still see the cache copy of it by searching for "erik kraft"+resume in Google.)

In 1999 User:Erik was too young to graduate; he would have been almost 14. Also, on that résumé Erik A. Kraft says that he did grad work at U.Illinois: "M.L.I.S., Graduate School of Library and Information Science University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, May 2005." There is no reason to doubt this.

Yesterday User:Erik added this line to his user page: "I'm from Chicago, IL and am a graduate of University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign." That's not quite the same thing, but it's close enough to raise eyebrows. It might even be true, although that would be quite a coincidence.

Today User:Erik deleted it and added this edit summary: "Removed incriminating information to avoid harassment."

I suspect that User:Erik is closely following the Murphy forum, and cleverly added that bit yesterday as a "false flag" operation. It looks like the Murphy forum link to the résumé appeared just hours before User:Erik added that line.

Then today he deleted it, with an eyebrow-raising edit summary, perhaps because he realized that he may be liable if it is proven that this information is false. The timing of User:Erik's posting and removal, and his edit summary, are potentially a problem for him. Originally he posted a photo that Murphy doesn't want posted, while hiding behind a screen name (that's bad enough). Now he might be playing games with Murphy (not a good idea).

It could make him liable if he is posting false information that facilitates the harassment of Erik A. Kraft, an innocent party, in order to further obscure his own identity.

Anyway, this is all speculation, but I think my scenario is much more likely than the scenario that User:Erik lied in 2006 on his user page about his age. In my scenario he had a motive for what he's done since yesterday, but I don't see any motive for lying about his age in 2006. I hope Murphy finds User:Erik, whoever he is.

By the way, I think there's enough questionable shenanigans going on here to get User:Erik thoroughly checkusered for all of his edits that relate at all to Murphy and/or Transformers, from as far back as the logs permit.

Arbcom, where are thee?