The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Discussions in this subforum are hidden from search engines.

However, they are not hidden from automobile engines, including the newer, more "environmentally-friendly" electric and hybrid engines. Also, please note that this subforum is meant to be used for discussion of the actual biographical articles themselves; more generalized discussions of BLP policy should be posted in the General Discussion or Bureaucracy forums.

15 Pages V  1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Slim and Will put the smackdown on LaRouche, was: SlimVirgin, back with a vengeance
Herschelkrustofsky
post Wed 2nd September 2009, 2:55pm
Post #1


Member
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,199
Joined: Tue 18th Apr 2006, 12:05pm
From: Kalifornia
Member No.: 130

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



The "old" SlimVirgin is back. popcorn.gif

Gone is the chastened, relatively civil, law-abiding SV. Over the past days, she has unleashed a torrential flood of edits on a subject dear to her heart, Lyndon LaRouche (T-H-L-K-D). Her rich palette of POV editing tactics, including intimidation and confusing and misleading edit summaries, is in play (for example, when adding some guy to the lead that says LaRouche is a fascist, her edit summary is "some tidying.") And, she has renewed her tag-team vows with Will Beback. They are so sweet when proclaiming that the two of them have together found "consensus." Was it good for you?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cedric
post Wed 2nd September 2009, 3:55pm
Post #2


General Gato
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,648
Joined: Sun 11th Mar 2007, 5:58pm
From: God's Ain Country
Member No.: 1,116

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 9:55am) *

The "old" SlimVirgin is back. popcorn.gif

Gone is the chastened, relatively civil, law-abiding SV. Over the past days, she has unleashed a torrential flood of edits on a subject dear to her heart, Lyndon LaRouche (T-H-L-K-D). Her rich palette of POV editing tactics, including intimidation and confusing and misleading edit summaries, is in play (for example, when adding some guy to the lead that says LaRouche is a fascist, her edit summary is "some tidying.") And, she has renewed her tag-team vows with Will Beback. They are so sweet when proclaiming that the two of them have together found "consensus." Was it good for you?

This was at least 110% predictable. As I have said before, lovers of intrigue rarely if ever fall out of love with it. They nearly always revert back to type, even though they occasionally lie low or switch tactics. Remember the "new" Richard Nixon?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Shalom
post Wed 2nd September 2009, 6:56pm
Post #3


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 878
Joined: Tue 1st Apr 2008, 4:00pm
Member No.: 5,566

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 10:55am) *

The "old" SlimVirgin is back. popcorn.gif

Gone is the chastened, relatively civil, law-abiding SV. Over the past days, she has unleashed a torrential flood of edits on a subject dear to her heart, Lyndon LaRouche (T-H-L-K-D). Her rich palette of POV editing tactics, including intimidation and confusing and misleading edit summaries, is in play (for example, when adding some guy to the lead that says LaRouche is a fascist, her edit summary is "some tidying.") And, she has renewed her tag-team vows with Will Beback. They are so sweet when proclaiming that the two of them have together found "consensus." Was it good for you?

"Some tidying" can mean anything. Cla68's arbitration evidence did include some misleading edit summaries, but when you add content, the content you add should speak for itself. Meanwhile, you seem unable to give up on the whole LaRouche cluster bomb. To be brutally honest, without Wikipedia I would never have heard of the fool, and I don't especially care.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
CharlotteWebb
post Wed 2nd September 2009, 8:09pm
Post #4


Postmaster General
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,740
Joined: Mon 18th Jun 2007, 2:09am
Member No.: 1,727

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Shalom @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 6:56pm) *

To be brutally honest, without Wikipedia I would never have heard of [LaRouche]...

Word. I first heard of him by reading an old arbcom case. dry.gif

Oh yeah Hersch since you asked: I am in fact an American citizen (yes sir, so far...)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Krimpet
post Wed 2nd September 2009, 10:30pm
Post #5


Senior Member
****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 402
Joined: Mon 16th Jul 2007, 3:44am
From: Rochester, NY
Member No.: 1,975

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 4:09pm) *

Word. I first heard of him by reading an old arbcom case. dry.gif

Lyndon LaRouche seems to be one of those topics grossly over-covered as a result of edit warring; loads of kooks use Wikipedia as a soapbox for their cult or fringe movement of choice, then their critics come and double the size of the article with their criticism, often with people citing their own works and sneaking in a little self-promotion in the process. The Scientology articles are the same way, as are other fringe topics, I'm sure.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
MBisanz
post Wed 2nd September 2009, 10:42pm
Post #6


Senior Member
****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 478
Joined: Sun 13th Apr 2008, 6:00am
Member No.: 5,693

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



The 15 most edited article talk pages are:

1. Talk:Main_Page 86775
2. Talk:Barack_Obama 30115
3. Talk:Sarah_Palin 23755
4. Talk:Global_warming 21823
5. Talk:George_W._Bush 21117
6. Talk:Intelligent_design 20672
7. Talk:Gaza_War 18572
8. Talk:Jesus 17841
9. Talk:Anarchism 17323
10. Talk:September_11_attacks 16194
11. Talk:Prem_Rawat 15946
12. Talk:Evolution 15219
13. Talk:Muhammad 14962
14. Talk:Homeopathy 14313
15. Talk:International_recognition_of_Kosovo 13985

I'm not that surprised about the main page, or Obama, Bush, Jesus, and Muhammad, but I am very surprised to see Prem Rawat (as opposed to Religion, Christianity, or Hinduism) and Homeopathy (as opposed to Health, Medicine, or Science) on the list.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
MBisanz
post Wed 2nd September 2009, 10:54pm
Post #7


Senior Member
****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 478
Joined: Sun 13th Apr 2008, 6:00am
Member No.: 5,693

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



It is probably also worth noting that the talk page for LaRouche is infrequently viewed at 318 times in July and 1,405 times in August compared to 4,662 times for my talk page. The talk page has only 3,492 edits, which isn't even enough to make the most edited talk page list. All of which seems on par for an article 3,071 hits a day (not even in the top 3,000 for for the site).
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
written by he who wrote it
post Wed 2nd September 2009, 11:36pm
Post #8


Commie Mutant Traitor
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 95
Joined: Mon 25th Sep 2006, 6:50pm
Member No.: 431



QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 2:55pm) *

The "old" SlimVirgin is back. popcorn.gif

Gone is the chastened, relatively civil, law-abiding SV. Over the past days, she has unleashed a torrential flood of edits on a subject dear to her heart, Lyndon LaRouche (T-H-L-K-D). Her rich palette of POV editing tactics, including intimidation and confusing and misleading edit summaries, is in play (for example, when adding some guy to the lead that says LaRouche is a fascist, her edit summary is "some tidying.")

Be fair: She did add some material to the lead (details available), so the edit summary was deceptive, but she wasn't sneaking in accusations of fascism: the text was already there.

This post has been edited by written by he who wrote it: Wed 2nd September 2009, 11:39pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cla68
post Wed 2nd September 2009, 11:40pm
Post #9


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,763
Joined: Fri 18th Apr 2008, 5:53pm
Member No.: 5,761

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 2:55pm) *

The "old" SlimVirgin is back. popcorn.gif

Gone is the chastened, relatively civil, law-abiding SV. Over the past days, she has unleashed a torrential flood of edits on a subject dear to her heart, Lyndon LaRouche (T-H-L-K-D). Her rich palette of POV editing tactics, including intimidation and confusing and misleading edit summaries, is in play (for example, when adding some guy to the lead that says LaRouche is a fascist, her edit summary is "some tidying.") And, she has renewed her tag-team vows with Will Beback. They are so sweet when proclaiming that the two of them have together found "consensus." Was it good for you?


It won't work to list a series of interviews of LaRouche with Russian or Chinese TV or newspaper journalists, who seem to give him more credibility than the media in the west. You (in the general sense) need to tie those reports into the topics that are more relevant to a general, "encyclopedic" overview of LaRouche's life and politics. If that is done, then it will be harder for anyone to justify removing the information.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Casliber
post Thu 3rd September 2009, 12:09am
Post #10


Senior Member
****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 425
Joined: Fri 19th Oct 2007, 10:08pm
Member No.: 3,559

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Some unusual topics get quite a going over - for instance, a bunch of birds named Conures or Parakeets - Conure is more specific but is an avicultural name..and the pet trade has been responsible for decline....waht's in a name?

Sun Parakeet or Conure talk page
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Casliber
post Thu 3rd September 2009, 12:25am
Post #11


Senior Member
****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 425
Joined: Fri 19th Oct 2007, 10:08pm
Member No.: 3,559

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Also the Liopleurodon talk page - should the appearance of a Liopleurodon in the youtube vid Charlie the unicorn be mentioned...rather involved and lengthy argument laugh.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
everyking
post Thu 3rd September 2009, 2:33am
Post #12


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,368
Joined: Mon 27th Mar 2006, 7:24am
Member No.: 81



QUOTE(Krimpet @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 11:30pm) *

QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 4:09pm) *

Word. I first heard of him by reading an old arbcom case. dry.gif

Lyndon LaRouche seems to be one of those topics grossly over-covered as a result of edit warring; loads of kooks use Wikipedia as a soapbox for their cult or fringe movement of choice, then their critics come and double the size of the article with their criticism, often with people citing their own works and sneaking in a little self-promotion in the process. The Scientology articles are the same way, as are other fringe topics, I'm sure.


I disagree--the upside to edit warring is traditionally that you get vastly expanded and improved content. The two sides beat each other black and blue, but as the beatings in part take the form of research, sourcing, and expansion, the ultimate result can be very positive. If not for all the LaRouche edit warring, articles related to LaRouche would no doubt be rather few and rather pitiful.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Shalom
post Thu 3rd September 2009, 3:43am
Post #13


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 878
Joined: Tue 1st Apr 2008, 4:00pm
Member No.: 5,566

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(everyking @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 10:33pm) *

QUOTE(Krimpet @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 11:30pm) *

QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 4:09pm) *

Word. I first heard of him by reading an old arbcom case. dry.gif

Lyndon LaRouche seems to be one of those topics grossly over-covered as a result of edit warring; loads of kooks use Wikipedia as a soapbox for their cult or fringe movement of choice, then their critics come and double the size of the article with their criticism, often with people citing their own works and sneaking in a little self-promotion in the process. The Scientology articles are the same way, as are other fringe topics, I'm sure.


I disagree--the upside to edit warring is traditionally that you get vastly expanded and improved content. The two sides beat each other black and blue, but as the beatings in part take the form of research, sourcing, and expansion, the ultimate result can be very positive. If not for all the LaRouche edit warring, articles related to LaRouche would no doubt be rather few and rather pitiful.

See that's the problem: for some people who prefer to keep importance in perspective, the articles on LaRouche should be short and pitiful compared to articles on people who make a real difference. I'm not espousing that perspective, but I can see why someone might think so. It's more congruous to expect proportional coverage in a centralized model, but Wikipedia's decentralized model leads to growth in odd topics. This is plain to see, writ small, in the collection of Good Articles and Featured Content.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dtobias
post Thu 3rd September 2009, 4:04am
Post #14


Obsessive trolling idiot [per JzG]
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,213
Joined: Sun 11th Feb 2007, 2:45pm
From: Boca Raton, FL, USA
Member No.: 962

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Shalom @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 11:43pm) *

See that's the problem: for some people who prefer to keep importance in perspective, the articles on LaRouche should be short and pitiful compared to articles on people who make a real difference.


Such as this one.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Shalom
post Thu 3rd September 2009, 5:13am
Post #15


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 878
Joined: Tue 1st Apr 2008, 4:00pm
Member No.: 5,566

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 3rd September 2009, 12:04am) *

QUOTE(Shalom @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 11:43pm) *

See that's the problem: for some people who prefer to keep importance in perspective, the articles on LaRouche should be short and pitiful compared to articles on people who make a real difference.


Such as this one.

Yes, someone wrote on the web that the Britney Spears article was (at that time) twice as long as the article on Brittany, a region of north west France.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Herschelkrustofsky
post Thu 3rd September 2009, 7:18am
Post #16


Member
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,199
Joined: Tue 18th Apr 2006, 12:05pm
From: Kalifornia
Member No.: 130

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(written by he who wrote it @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 4:36pm) *

QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 2:55pm) *

The "old" SlimVirgin is back. popcorn.gif

Gone is the chastened, relatively civil, law-abiding SV. Over the past days, she has unleashed a torrential flood of edits on a subject dear to her heart, Lyndon LaRouche (T-H-L-K-D). Her rich palette of POV editing tactics, including intimidation and confusing and misleading edit summaries, is in play (for example, when adding some guy to the lead that says LaRouche is a fascist, her edit summary is "some tidying.")

Be fair: She did add some material to the lead (details available), so the edit summary was deceptive, but she wasn't sneaking in accusations of fascism: the text was already there.
No, she was sneaking in the (non-notable) guy; his accusations of fascism come later in the article.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Moulton
post Thu 3rd September 2009, 11:19am
Post #17


Anthropologist from Mars
*********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 10,220
Joined: Mon 29th Oct 2007, 9:56pm
From: Greater Boston
Member No.: 3,670

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Shalom @ Thu 3rd September 2009, 1:13am) *
Yes, someone wrote on the web that the Britney Spears article was (at that time) twice as long as the article on Brittany, a region of north west France.

Some enterprising entrepreneur (hello Greg) should start a company in Brittany to manufacture and sell reproductions of medieval armaments. The company, of course, would be named Brittany Spears.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Lar
post Thu 3rd September 2009, 2:22pm
Post #18


"His blandness goes to 11!"
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,116
Joined: Wed 26th Dec 2007, 6:04pm
From: A large LEGO storage facility
Member No.: 4,290



QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 3rd September 2009, 7:19am) *

QUOTE(Shalom @ Thu 3rd September 2009, 1:13am) *
Yes, someone wrote on the web that the Britney Spears article was (at that time) twice as long as the article on Brittany, a region of north west France.

Some enterprising entrepreneur (hello Greg) should start a company in Brittany to manufacture and sell reproductions of medieval armaments. The company, of course, would be named Brittany Spears.

mod +1 funny
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
CharlotteWebb
post Thu 3rd September 2009, 3:09pm
Post #19


Postmaster General
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,740
Joined: Mon 18th Jun 2007, 2:09am
Member No.: 1,727

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(MBisanz @ Wed 2nd September 2009, 10:54pm) *

It is probably also worth noting that the talk page for LaRouche is infrequently viewed at 318 times in July and 1,405 times in August compared to 4,662 times for my talk page. The talk page has only 3,492 edits, which isn't even enough to make the most edited talk page list. All of which seems on par for an article 3,071 hits a day (not even in the top 3,000 for for the site).

Only 127 for my talk page. Makes me feel so ronery.

Anyway that's just the main biography article. I don't suppose you could get a total figure for all articles/talk-pages related to LaRouche and the LaRouche "movement"?

QUOTE(Shalom @ Thu 3rd September 2009, 3:43am) *

See that's the problem: for some people who prefer to keep importance in perspective, the articles on LaRouche should be short and pitiful compared to articles on people who make a real difference.

Yeah it's almost as if we need to actively recruit a bunch of boring, normal people to work on those articles. dry.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Thu 3rd September 2009, 5:15pm
Post #20


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 3rd September 2009, 7:19am) *

QUOTE(Shalom @ Thu 3rd September 2009, 1:13am) *
Yes, someone wrote on the web that the Britney Spears article was (at that time) twice as long as the article on Brittany, a region of north west France.

Some enterprising entrepreneur (hello Greg) should start a company in Brittany to manufacture and sell reproductions of medieval armaments. The company, of course, would be named Brittany Spears.


I was already taking out a "doing business as" name registration in Nantes, but we were planning to grow and sell asparagus, not pole weapons.

Speaking of which, do the Wikipedians who create maps go to some sort of clinic or school for Unhelpful Cartography, or something?

This post has been edited by thekohser: Thu 3rd September 2009, 5:16pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

15 Pages V  1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd 11 14, 1:16pm