Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
_ SlimVirgin _ SlimVirgin versus Jake Wartenberg
Posted by: gomi
SlimVirgin manages to be the turd in the punchbowl once again, this time to little effect, at Jake Wartenberg (T-C-L-K-R-D)
's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Jake_Wartenberg. Now, I don't know anything about Jake, but Slim manages to be the http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FJake_Wartenberg&diff=309698138&oldid=309697817 against 151 in favor. She gets in the rather amazing accusation that Jake is a http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FJake_Wartenberg&diff=309697817&oldid=309697011! She then has the gall to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jake_Wartenberg&diff=prev&oldid=309709510 to an email from her defending himself.
How does she get away with this?
Posted by: CharlotteWebb
SlimVirgin manages to be the turd in the punchbowl once again, this time to little effect, at Jake Wartenberg (T-C-L-K-R-D) 's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Jake_Wartenberg. Now, I don't know anything about Jake, but Slim manages to be the http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FJake_Wartenberg&diff=309698138&oldid=309697817 against 151 in favor. She gets in the rather amazing accusation that Jake is a http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FJake_Wartenberg&diff=309697817&oldid=309697011! She then has the gall to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jake_Wartenberg&diff=prev&oldid=309709510 to an email from her defending himself.
How does she get away with this?
Hmm... it was closed as "pass" immediately following her vote. No 24-hour extension for this one.
But hey that's nothing, the other oppose voter (now oversighted) described Mr. Wartenberg as a "dangerous sociopath with an extensive criminal record".
Posted by: Newyorkbrad
SlimVirgin manages to be the turd in the punchbowl once again, this time to little effect, at Jake Wartenberg (T-C-L-K-R-D) 's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Jake_Wartenberg. Now, I don't know anything about Jake, but Slim manages to be the http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FJake_Wartenberg&diff=309698138&oldid=309697817 against 151 in favor. She gets in the rather amazing accusation that Jake is a http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FJake_Wartenberg&diff=309697817&oldid=309697011! She then has the gall to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jake_Wartenberg&diff=prev&oldid=309709510 to an email from her defending himself.
How does she get away with this?
Hmm... it was closed as "pass" immediately following her vote. No 24-hour extension for this one.
But hey that's nothing, the other oppose voter (now oversighted) described Mr. Wartenberg as a "dangerous sociopath with an extensive criminal record".
The latter has been explained by the editor who posted it as a misguided joke.
Posted by: CharlotteWebb
The latter has been explained by the editor who posted it as a misguided joke.
Yeah but... it seems almost prophetic in this context. That is, this user almost seems to be satirizing other (less frivolous) accusations before they were lodged.
Posted by: Kelly Martin
Posted by: Moulton
Misguidance appears to be a recurring them in WikiCulture.
Methinks they need a new guidance system.
Posted by: tarantino
Jake has a fairly notable father. He's http://www.amazon.com/Thomas-E.-Wartenberg/e/B001IU0VH8, a philosophy professor at Mount Holyoke College and author of several books including Existentialism: A Beginner's Guide, The Nature of Art and Big Ideas for Little Kids: Teaching Philosophy Through Children's Literature.
Jake also helps runs his father's wiki and his high school's website.
Posted by: Milton Roe
Jake has a fairly notable father. He's http://www.amazon.com/Thomas-E.-Wartenberg/e/B001IU0VH8, a philosophy professor at Mount Holyoke College and author of several books including Existentialism: A Beginner's Guide, The Nature of Art and Big Ideas for Little Kids: Teaching Philosophy Through Children's Literature.
Jake also helps runs his father's wiki and his high school's website.
Is it only me, or is there something vaguely amusing about a book titled Existentialism: A Beginner's Guide ?A guide for beginners, from somebody who is... further along?
Who has passed all the requirements of Intermediate Existentialism and is well on their way to (what else?) Advanced Existentialism? From the dustjacket blurb: As a beginning existentialist, I began to feel angst at my failure to detect ultimate meaning in my life and the universe. But that was before I found Professor Wartenberg's guidebook, which told me what to do.
Posted by: Jay
Jake has a fairly notable father. He's Tom Wartenberg
Quick someone start a BLP of him!
Posted by: Milton Roe
Jake has a fairly notable father. He's Tom Wartenberg
Quick someone start a BLP of him!
Absolutely.
Surely there are some passages from his work which can be cited to show that he's interested in exposing young impressionable minds to other than pure and wholesome Christian ideals.
Posted by: tarantino
Jake has a fairly notable father. He's Tom Wartenberg
Quick someone start a BLP of him!
Absolutely.
Surely there are some passages from his work which can be cited to show that he's interested in exposing young impressionable minds to other than pure and wholesome Christian ideals.
His website is linked from Philosophy for Children (T-H-L-K-D), he's a red link in Aesthetics (T-H-L-K-D)* and he's a regular columnist for Philosophy Now (T-H-L-K-D).
*EDIT The http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aesthetics&diff=prev&oldid=165977866 by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Twartenb himself.
Posted by: gomi
Slim's not liking thehttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SlimVirgin&diff=prev&oldid=309837926 on her talk page! She removes the note from LessHeard vanUÂ (T-C-L-K-R-D)
with the comment "discussed elsewhere", even though, in my searches, it isn't.
Posted by: EricBarbour
Even a year ago, if she had voted to oppose in an RFA, there would have been 20-30
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Cla68 sympathy votes directly following hers, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Ambuj.Saxena.
The crazy woman is slowly losing her popularity.
Good.
Posted by: Lar
Slim's not liking thehttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SlimVirgin&diff=prev&oldid=309837926 on her talk page! She removes the note from LessHeard vanUÂ (T-C-L-K-R-D) with the comment "discussed elsewhere", even though, in my searches, it isn't.
Look up a couple of sections on her talk page, there seems to be a thread http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SlimVirgin#Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship.2FJake_Wartenberg. She could have politely moved it instead of just deleting, (*) but she may well be right about it being discussed elsewhere. LHvU should repost in that thread.
* - this is where it's obligatory for me to point out that I almost(**) never remove stuff from my own talk page, even if I strongly disagree with it... I commend the practice to everyone, it makes it a lot less likely that people think I have something to hide.
** - limited exceptions have been very egregious vandalism, I think a review would find it's happened less than a half dozen times since 2006 and usually not even removed by me.
Posted by: gomi
The section above is about her accusation in the RFA. LHVU's note was about the impropriety of demanding email obeisance. Related subjects, but not the same.
One can only imagine the kind of tribute she is exacting for her silence. She's like J. Edgar Hoover, with files full of compromising 8x10 glossies.
Posted by: MBisanz
I've worked with Jake a fair amount and I really couldn't see him being a sockmaster, if only because he's disclosed his identity. Usually sockers "mess up" the first time by being trusting enough to reveal their information and then later try to stuff the cat back in the bag when they start socking. That said, SV did support my RFA, even though I did not know her at the time and had never worked in any areas she did and I had a track record somewhat similar to Jake's, so I can't explain the oppose either.
Posted by: CharlotteWebb
If you have evidence, I am of course willing to join in on-wiki discussion of my close. This was, clearly, a situation with little precedent. I have been following the discussion, and did read and consider your comments before closing. -- Pakaran 02:41, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
It was?
Posted by: Cedric
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FJake_Wartenberg&diff=309697817&oldid=309697011 I can still remember a time when I was just as perturbed by the Every School In The Known Universe Must Have A Wikipedia Article Cabal (a/k/a "the schoolers") as what Ms. Mack still appears to be. Unlike Ms. Mack, I moved on some time ago; realizing that the whole inclusionist vs. deletionist ba-telle was a mere uninteresting sideshow to a far wider drama. Poor Linda! Fighting and re-fighting the ba-telles of long, long ago. Let it go, Linda. Let it go.
Is it only me, or is there something vaguely amusing about a book titled Existentialism: A Beginner's Guide ?A guide for beginners, from somebody who is... further along?
Who has passed all the requirements of Intermediate Existentialism and is well on their way to (what else?) Advanced Existentialism? From the dustjacket blurb: As a beginning existentialist, I began to feel angst at my failure to detect ultimate meaning in my life and the universe. But that was before I found Professor Wartenberg's guidebook, which told me what to do.
Please, Uncle Milty, tell me that that blurb was just for yuks and not for reals.
Posted by: GlassBeadGame
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FJake_Wartenberg&diff=309697817&oldid=309697011 I can still remember a time when I was just as perturbed by the Every School In The Known Universe Must Have A Wikipedia Article Cabal (a/k/a "the schoolers") as what Ms. Mack still appears to be. Unlike Ms. Mack, I moved on some time ago; realizing that the whole inclusionist vs. deletionist ba-telle was a mere uninteresting sideshow to a far wider drama. Poor Linda! Fighting and re-fighting the ba-telles of long, long ago. Let it go, Linda. Let it go.
Is it only me, or is there something vaguely amusing about a book titled Existentialism: A Beginner's Guide ?A guide for beginners, from somebody who is... further along?
Who has passed all the requirements of Intermediate Existentialism and is well on their way to (what else?) Advanced Existentialism? From the dustjacket blurb: As a beginning existentialist, I began to feel angst at my failure to detect ultimate meaning in my life and the universe. But that was before I found Professor Wartenberg's guidebook, which told me what to do.
Please, Uncle Milty, tell me that that blurb was just for yuks and not for reals.
There may be a reason why Milton posted that...but we'll never know.
Posted by: The Adversary
We forgot the Essjay version: Existentialism for Dummies
<edit:>
<snip>One can only imagine the kind of tribute she is exacting for her silence. She's like J. Edgar Hoover, with files full of compromising 8x10 glossies.
This reminds me of some of Kelly Martins observations in the Utgard Loki-debate: http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=25140&view=findpost&p=182284.
Irregardless of what is correct in this case; the basic problem is not the gamers, IMHO. The problem is the game, (ie WP-rules) which encourage and reward "gamers".
Posted by: The Adversary
Update:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jake_Wartenberg&diff=prev&oldid=310053789 etc etc
Posted by: Nerd
Update:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jake_Wartenberg&diff=prev&oldid=310053789 etc etc
Yadda yadda. She's certainly not helping herself behaving like this.
Posted by: gomi
If only she would "apologize" by leaving Wikipedia permanently, we could then trust her sincerity. Short of that, not so much.
Posted by: Heat
It's good that she apologised though I don't think she really had a choice. It's better to see that people have caught on to SV's guilty by suspicion method of prosecution and no longer allow it to derail RFAs etc.
Posted by: Random832
Or at least no longer give it sufficient time to when it didn't already have. Little steps.
Posted by: The Adversary
It's good that she apologised though I don't think she really had a choice. It's better to see that people have caught on to SV's guilty by suspicion method of prosecution and no longer allow it to derail RFAs etc.
I recall seeing SV strongly protesting when an editor (Ben H?) suggested a couple of years ago, (after the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Ambuj.Saxena?), that a tool should be invented for seeing who voted with who ...but in spite of the protest, such a tool was made. Thankfully. As the Root said: little steps.
Sooo, me thinks: the most significant thing in this little teapot storm was that the band of drivelling Pavlovian dogs did not turn up and vote like their leader. (ok, ok, I know I it is a mad metaphor-mix
) (and "mad analogy-mix" doesn´t sound so...swell.. 
)