Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

_ Wikipedia in Blogland _ The Mike Handel Story

Posted by: John Limey

BLP hoax accusing fake Oxford professor of murder makes it into the DYK section and draws http://stats.grok.se/en/201003/Mike_Handel. Read all about it at http://onwikipedia.blogspot.com/2010/03/dr-handel-or-how-i-learned-to-stop.html.

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(John Limey @ Tue 2nd March 2010, 6:18pm) *

BLP hoax accusing fake Oxford professor of murder makes it into the DYK section and draws http://stats.grok.se/en/201003/Mike_Handel. Read all about it at http://onwikipedia.blogspot.com/2010/03/dr-handel-or-how-i-learned-to-stop.html.

Oh, that was diabolical and clever. And educational and funny. And it accomplished something maybe. Even.

Limey, I'm starting to like you. In the brotherly and collegial regard of one academic toward another. wub.gif Vivat membrum quodlibet and all that.

Posted by: Kevin

QUOTE(John Limey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 11:18am) *

BLP hoax accusing fake Oxford professor of murder makes it into the DYK section and draws http://stats.grok.se/en/201003/Mike_Handel. Read all about it at http://onwikipedia.blogspot.com/2010/03/dr-handel-or-how-i-learned-to-stop.html.


OK, but nearly everyone here already knows Wikipedia is broken, particularly regarding BLPs. For those who don't, will this extra proof turn them? Probably not.

How can this be leveraged to actually make a change?

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(Kevin @ Tue 2nd March 2010, 10:11pm) *

How can this be leveraged to actually make a change?


Jimbo bash.gif Lever-Rage

Jon tongue.gif

Posted by: EricBarbour

Nice work, JL! Thanks!

And....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Resource_Exchange/Resource_Request#Magdalen_College_Record_and_Oxford_Times MuffledThud asking for help on Resource Exchange.

Still hasn't figured out he was punked. Poor lad/whatever.

So, what happened to the BLP itself? Oversighted out of existence?

Posted by: carbuncle

Excellent work, but I would have given you extra points if you had titled your blog posting "Burning Mike Handel at both ends"...

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(carbuncle @ Tue 2nd March 2010, 9:09pm) *

Excellent work, but I would have given you extra points if you had titled your blog posting "Burning Mike Handel at both ends"...

pinch.gif

It sheds a lovely light! biggrin.gif

Posted by: NuclearWarfare

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 4:04am) *

Nice work, JL! Thanks!

And....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Resource_Exchange/Resource_Request#Magdalen_College_Record_and_Oxford_Times MuffledThud asking for help on Resource Exchange.

Still hasn't figured out he was punked. Poor lad/whatever.

So, what happened to the BLP itself? Oversighted out of existence?


Merely deleted ( 00:14, 3 March 2010 Skomorokh (talk | contribs | block) deleted "Mike Handel" ‎ (G3: Vandalism - blatant hoax or misinformation (CSDH)) (view/restore))

"On Wikipedia" has several revisions stored on WebCite though, and those are still up.

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(Kevin @ Tue 2nd March 2010, 10:11pm) *

How can this be leveraged to actually make a change?


You were expecting a Messiah?

Jon tongue.gif

Posted by: Alison

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 2nd March 2010, 8:04pm) *

So, what happened to the BLP itself? Oversighted out of existence?

Just http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=&page=Mike+Handel mellow.gif

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Tue 2nd March 2010, 11:38pm) *

QUOTE(carbuncle @ Tue 2nd March 2010, 9:09pm) *

Excellent work, but I would have given you extra points if you had titled your blog posting "Burning Mike Handel at both ends" …


pinch.gif

It sheds a lovely light! biggrin.gif


http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/20233

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 2nd March 2010, 9:04pm) *

Nice work, JL! Thanks!

And....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Resource_Exchange/Resource_Request#Magdalen_College_Record_and_Oxford_Times MuffledThud asking for help on Resource Exchange.

Still hasn't figured out he was punked. Poor lad/whatever.

I have to imagine "MufledThud" as the sound of his jaw hitting the floor when he finally figures out he's been pwned. jawdrop.gif

As for the rest of WP and the chattering-class of obstructionism, there, it may be that this helps not at all. Some people are so stupid that it's impossible to score any debate points against them, because they don't recognize they've been wrong and that they're position is illogical or untennable. They still keep on with it as though nothing had happened. For them, the pointiest POINT might as well be blunt and dull. There is no difference in effect.

Perhaps somebody will pick up on the question of the episemological relevence of a citation to a newspaper of record, that doesn't exist on-line and that nobody is willing to dig out of a morgue. If a citation is about an event and nobody reads it, is it the same as if it didn't exist in the first place? Dead tree standard fall in forest; no noise! blink.gif ermm.gif hmmm.gif

confused.gif

We've long had an argument that WP can't do any damage by resurrecting or exhuming these factoids about living people, and putting them on the web, when they should by all rights have stayed decently mouldering away in the morgue, undisturbed. And now we're sure to see an identical argument that it can't do any real harm if WP puts up such stuff when it's actually imaginary.

In the end, the people who argue for BLP for such people who have only morgue stuff available on them, don't really care if that information actually exists in the morgue or not, do they? The truth is not the POINT. They just like to write BLPs. The argument about "reliable sources" which are timeless (notability is NOT temporary, yo, yo) is a distraction, and it doesn't matter what you prove, or don't prove, about it. It won't change their minds, because they do this stuff to non-notables because they want to, not because they can defend it with any sort of cogent argument of any kind.

But at least we have cleared some rubbish out of the way.

Posted by: bambi

As of 0500 March 3 UTC, it is number one in Google for a search for "mike handel" - with or without the quotes. http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:ATAcs-rNIKwJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Handel Why doesn't Wikipedia use the NOARCHIVE meta to keep those cache links off of Google, Yahoo, and Bing? This meta in the header section of any page won't affect the ranking for that page.

It's also number one in Yahoo and Bing, but apparently they don't have their cache thing together yet for this particluar article.


Posted by: Somey

Good work on documenting each step of the process - some folks might not have bothered to do that, probably because it makes the whole task less fun. Not that shooting ducks in a barrel is supposed to be fun, but it does make the whole thing much more citable.

How can we turn this into a top-line blurb, then? "Burning Mike Handel at both ends"? "Existence isn't all it's cracked up to be"...?

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(Somey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 1:24am) *

Good work on documenting each step of the process - some folks might not have bothered to do that, probably because it makes the whole task less fun. Not that shooting ducks in a barrel is supposed to be fun, but it does make the whole thing much more citable.

How can we turn this into a top-line blurb, then? "Burning Mike Handel at both ends"? "Existence isn't all it's cracked up to be"...?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Murders_in_the_Rue_Morgue


Okay, that's obscure.

Posted by: CharlotteWebb

QUOTE(bambi @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 5:06am) *

As of 0500 March 3 UTC, it is number one in Google for a search for "mike handel" - with or without the quotes. http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:ATAcs-rNIKwJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Handel Why doesn't Wikipedia use the NOARCHIVE meta to keep those cache links off of Google, Yahoo, and Bing?

Well, disabling the cache would make the "deletion review" process even more corrupt than it is now.

Perhaps the best accountability trade-off would be to make "former articles" visible to registered users who can solve a captcha.

Posted by: John Limey

QUOTE(Kevin @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 3:11am) *

QUOTE(John Limey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 11:18am) *

BLP hoax accusing fake Oxford professor of murder makes it into the DYK section and draws http://stats.grok.se/en/201003/Mike_Handel. Read all about it at http://onwikipedia.blogspot.com/2010/03/dr-handel-or-how-i-learned-to-stop.html.


OK, but nearly everyone here already knows Wikipedia is broken, particularly regarding BLPs. For those who don't, will this extra proof turn them? Probably not.

How can this be leveraged to actually make a change?


We thought it might serve as a wakeup call. Judging by the reaction on Wikipedia, it did nothing like that, which is really, truly disappointing. I've said before, and I come to believe it more every day, that only major stories in the mainstream press have the potential to influence Wikipedia at all, and even then the impact is uncertain.

I suppose I'm a bit more idealistic than many of the people here, but we did expect more, and I honestly feel like just shutting the blog down. It turns out that people just don't care about facts after all. What's the point? The evidence is out there from Seigenthaler to Taner Akcam to Mike Handel and many more, but there are too many &%^$* on Wikipedia who won't change a darn thing to actually protect people. The willful blindness to the truth is simply shocking.

QUOTE(Somey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 8:24am) *

Good work on documenting each step of the process - some folks might not have bothered to do that, probably because it makes the whole task less fun. Not that shooting ducks in a barrel is supposed to be fun, but it does make the whole thing much more citable.

How can we turn this into a top-line blurb, then? "Burning Mike Handel at both ends"? "Existence isn't all it's cracked up to be"...?


I liked Zoloft's http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=28706&view=findpost&p=224333: "Wikipedia can't Handel the truth".

Posted by: Trick cyclist

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 4:38am) *

QUOTE(carbuncle @ Tue 2nd March 2010, 9:09pm) *

Excellent work, but I would have given you extra points if you had titled your blog posting "Burning Mike Handel at both ends"...

pinch.gif

It sheds a lovely light! biggrin.gif

Hoo!

http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/20233

Good thing you dont edit on WQ, Prof. Roe! Or do you?

And Jon Awbrey gave this link and he didnt notice either.

Posted by: Doc glasgow

Wow, that's exactly the breaching experiment that I was contemplating myself. Kudos to the perpetrator - solid point made!

For the record, the article (as deleted) read...

QUOTE
Michael "Mike" Handel (born June 3, 1930) is a biologist. He was the Terrence F. Gregory Professor of Biology at Magdalen College, University of Oxford.
Contents
[hide]

* 1 Early life
* 2 Early academic career
* 3 Israel
* 4 Oxford
* 5 Retirement
* 6 References

Early life

Handel was born in Ann Arbor, Michigan in 1930. His father, Howard Handel, was a British chemist at Imperial College London, then on sabbatical at the University of Michigan. When Handel was three, in 1933, the family moved back to London.[1]

In 1947, Handel entered University College, Oxford where he read biology, graduating in 1950. After graduation, Handel, capitalizing on his American citizenship (gained by virtue of being born in Michigan) left the UK for the US, working for a year in a laboratory at Columbia University in New York City. In 1951, he began graduate study in the biology department at the University of California, Berkeley. In 1954–1955, he returned to the UK to do research at the University of Cambridge and in 1957 he received his doctorate from Berkeley.[1]
Early academic career

Handel left Berkeley to become a lecturer in biology at the University of Glasgow, where he remained until 1960, teaching and conducting research in animal behavior and psychopharmacology. In 1961–1962, Handel received grant money to study animal behavior in his own lab at Glasgow and left his teaching responsibilities behind.[2]

Also, in 1961, Handel married Jane MacLaren, a student in literature at Glasgow. They would go on to have three children.[1]
Israel

In 1963, Handel was invited to visit Tel Aviv University as a researcher and faculty member, and he arrived ready to continue his research. He left in 1968 to return to the UK.[1]
Oxford

In 1968, Handel joined Magdalen College as professor of biology. He remained at Magdalen until 1986, and from 1971 to 1983 held the highly prestigious Terrence F. Gregory Chair. The college eliminated the chair in 1983 for funding reasons.[3]

Nonetheless, many of Handel's experiments, particularly in the 1970s, were highly controversial with animal rights groups, who attempted to bomb his laboratory in 1974; the bomb failed to explode and no one was injured.[4]According to the police, the triggering mechanism on the bomb, which was based on parts taken from an alarm clock, was not properly connected. Handel defended his research after the attack, saying that it was important for the pursuit of knowledge and science, but protesters called him a "Nazi", a "murderer," and accused him of "perpetrating a holocaust against animals". [5]

Handel's research, nonetheless, led to important insights into the toxicity of psychoactive compounds and set the groundwork for later accomplishments in the field.[1]
Retirement

Handel retired from Magdalen in 1986, moving to a family home outside Birmingham. He lectured briefly at the University of Birmingham but soon withdrew from academic life. He currently lives at his home near Birmingham and enjoys spending time with his grandchildren.[2]
References

1. ^ a b c d e "Farewell to Professor Handel". The Magdalen College Record. 1987.
2. ^ a b "Catching up with Michael Handel - His Reflections on Magdalen in the 70s". The Magdalen College Record. 1996.
3. ^ "Gregory Chair Suspended". The Magdalen College Record. 1983.
4. ^ Patterson, Charles (1993). Animal Rights. Enslow Publishing. pp. 79.
5. ^ Richards, David (11 April 1974). "Attempted bombing of biology lab". The Oxford Times.

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(John Limey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 6:57am) *

We thought it might serve as a wakeup call.


You don't know them vewwy well, do you?

Please refer to previous advice about talking to cultists and fundamentalists.

To wit … or not … don't bother.

Jon dry.gif

Posted by: thekohser

This was a fantastic display of not only Wikipedia's gullible trust in their fellow man, but in their trust that "the system works".

John, I'm curious to know if all of these edits were made from the same IP address, and what have been the consequences on any of the IPs used? Also, how much time and effort did this take you? I would like to see the "news clipping" forgery from the Oxford Times, too. Did you print it, then crumple it up, then smooth it out, then add a bit of sepia tone to the digital snapshot? Durova might be able to give a few pointers on how to make a fresh print-out look like it's from the "olden days".

laugh.gif

Really, this was excellent work -- but, the dismaying fact remains that if it doesn't get picked up by the mainstream press, it will go largely unnoticed. Have you contacted anyone in the media? I will ping my contacts today, on your behalf.

P.S. Looks like it was viewed http://stats.grok.se/en/201003/Mike_Handel. Stupendous.

Posted by: bambi

QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 1:32pm) *

QUOTE(John Limey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 6:57am) *

We thought it might serve as a wakeup call.


You don't know them vewwy well, do you?

Please refer to previous advice about talking to cultists and fundamentalists.

To wit … or not … don't bother.

Jon dry.gif

Yeah, as soon as I posted that bit about the Google cache copy, which asked why Wikipedia doesn't use NOARCHIVE, I then asked myself, "Why do I keep posting extremely reasonable, well-considered suggestions about how Wikipedia handles the search engines? Haven't I learned over the last 4.5 years that it is totally pointless to do this? If I keep doing the same thing while expecting a different result, doesn't that mean that I'm insane?"

Posted by: John Limey

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 3:13pm) *

This was a fantastic display of not only Wikipedia's gullible trust in their fellow man, but in their trust that "the system works".

John, I'm curious to know if all of these edits were made from the same IP address, and what have been the consequences on any of the IPs used? Also, how much time and effort did this take you? I would like to see the "news clipping" forgery from the Oxford Times, too. Did you print it, then crumple it up, then smooth it out, then add a bit of sepia tone to the digital snapshot? Durova might be able to give a few pointers on how to make a fresh print-out look like it's from the "olden days".

laugh.gif

Really, this was excellent work -- but, the dismaying fact remains that if it doesn't get picked up by the mainstream press, it will go largely unnoticed. Have you contacted anyone in the media? I will ping my contacts today, on your behalf.

P.S. Looks like it was viewed http://stats.grok.se/en/201003/Mike_Handel. Stupendous.


The forgery was not especially sophisticated. David handled it, and we were both pleased with the results. It's (at least temporarily) on WikiMedia Commons( http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Handel_hoax.JPG). I'm not quite sure what the techniques involved were, but I'll ask.

I tried getting in touch with a few media types, but I have no connections, and no nibbles thus far.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(John Limey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 10:39am) *

I tried getting in touch with a few media types, but I have no connections, and no nibbles thus far.


Not even Cade Metz? Maybe Cade is getting tired of WP -- even the Roger Davies plagiarism dust up didn't rouse Cade from napping.

But, then again, it is not a new story -- for years, articles on WP's unreliable infrastructure have circulated. This is another to add to the pile.

Also, other fraudulent DYKs have been identified before, so this is just an extravagant variation on a well-established trick.

Posted by: John Limey

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 4:07pm) *

QUOTE(John Limey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 10:39am) *

I tried getting in touch with a few media types, but I have no connections, and no nibbles thus far.


Not even Cade Metz? Maybe Cade is getting tired of WP -- even the Roger Davies plagiarism dust up didn't rouse Cade from napping.

But, then again, it is not a new story -- for years, articles on WP's unreliable infrastructure have circulated. This is another to add to the pile.

Also, other fraudulent DYKs have been identified before, so this is just an extravagant variation on a well-established trick.


Yes, there was nothing particularly new here. BLP disasters and fake DYKs are as old as Wikipedia, but this one was particularly bad. I think, in retrospect, that we might have done better at attracting media attention if we had found some reporter and tipped him off before we announced the hoax on the blog, thus allowing the reporter to have the exclusive scoop.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(John Limey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 6:57am) *

We thought it might serve as a wakeup call. Judging by the reaction on Wikipedia, it did nothing like that, which is really, truly disappointing.


That is no surprise. The only time there is any stirring is if some lunatic is yelling his head off. Content is not king -- it's all about slapstick and melodrama.


QUOTE(John Limey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 11:11am) *
BLP disasters and fake DYKs are as old as Wikipedia, but this one was particularly bad. I think, in retrospect, that we might have done better at attracting media attention if we had found some reporter and tipped him off before we announced the hoax on the blog, thus allowing the reporter to have the exclusive scoop.


Seigenthaler was worse because it was a real person. A phony BLP that wins a worthless award is not news, sorry.

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 11:07am) *

QUOTE(John Limey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 10:39am) *

I tried getting in touch with a few media types, but I have no connections, and no nibbles thus far.


Not even Cade Metz? Maybe Cade is getting tired of WP — even the Roger Davies plagiarism dust up didn't rouse Cade from napping.

But, then again, it is not a new story — for years, articles on WP's unreliable infrastructure have circulated. This is another to add to the pile.

Also, other fraudulent DYKs have been identified before, so this is just an extravagant variation on a well-established trick.


Not sexy enough for either the Main scream.gif or the BotBoy media —

Carbuncle and Milton's link from Mike Handel to lesbians?

Close, but no cigar …

Jon tongue.gif

Posted by: John Limey

Jimmy Wales has now weighed in about this on his talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Mike_Handel_-_blatant_negative_BLP_hoax_made_DYK. Some of the things he said were, in my opinion, perfect.

QUOTE

But while this case points to some easy fixes to policy, there's also a deeper and more philosophical question relating to "inclusionism and deletionism" and one reason why as Wikipedia has grown larger and larger, I have become more deletionist. This incident confirms, more clearly than any other that I have seen, something I have been saying for awhile that it is absolutely not possible for us to responsibly have BLPs on marginally notable people. I strongly support that we look at notability policy and tighten it quite severely, especially for BLPs. If a subject isn't notable enough to have reliable sources that are easily checked, then we shouldn't have an article about that person at all. And we absolutely cannot accept negative BLP statements from reliable sources that can't be easily checked.

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(John Limey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 11:24am) *

Jimmy Wales has now weighed in about this on his talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Mike_Handel_-_blatant_negative_BLP_hoax_made_DYK. Some of the things he said were, in my opinion, perfect.


Woids, Boids.
Cheep, Cheep.

Jon tongue.gif

Posted by: John Limey

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 4:14pm) *

QUOTE(John Limey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 11:11am) *
BLP disasters and fake DYKs are as old as Wikipedia, but this one was particularly bad. I think, in retrospect, that we might have done better at attracting media attention if we had found some reporter and tipped him off before we announced the hoax on the blog, thus allowing the reporter to have the exclusive scoop.


Seigenthaler was worse because it was a real person. A phony BLP that wins a worthless award is not news, sorry.


To be sure, Seigenthaler was much more significant in that he was real. However, quantity of news coverage generated is not at all proportional to the severity of the BLP incident. The Akcam incident was FAR worse than what happened to Seigenthaler but didn't make it into nearly as many papers. Why? Well perhaps because Seigenthaler was first, but I think it's more likely that it's because Seigenthaler is extremely well-connected in media circles.

Posted by: Doc glasgow

This was a case of "no real animals were hurt in this experiment" - which is good.


But it is only a matter of time before a directly libellous hoax makes DYK. That will hit the press.

Naturally, I don't recommend that breaching experiment to anyone, unless they've got low morals, deep pockets, and good lawyers.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 11:41am) *

This was a case of "no real animals were hurt in this experiment" - which is good.


But it is only a matter of time before a directly libellous hoax makes DYK. That will hit the press.

Naturally, I don't recommend that breaching experiment to anyone, unless they've got low morals, deep pockets, and good lawyers.


...and IPs that cannot be traced. evilgrin.gif

Posted by: SB_Johnny

I actually think it's interesting that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/David_Lindsey isn't blocked "on principle", which is either (1) a positive sign that some lessons were learned from Greg's breach, (2) a sign that Durova doesn't have a personal grudge against him yet (since he's not Greg), or (3) they haven't gotten around to it yet.

Especially interesting because they seem rather block-happy the past week or two otherwise.

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(Trick cyclist @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 5:30am) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 4:38am) *

QUOTE(carbuncle @ Tue 2nd March 2010, 9:09pm) *

Excellent work, but I would have given you extra points if you had titled your blog posting "Burning Mike Handel at both ends"...

pinch.gif

It sheds a lovely light! biggrin.gif

Hoo!

http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/20233

Good thing you dont edit on WQ, Prof. Roe! Or do you?

And Jon Awbrey gave this link and he didnt notice either.

I'm thinking about editing on WQ as "Quillercastingcouch." My main function being to audition Baxter socks, who are easily detectable by their predilection to correct poetry quotes. The purpose being to see if they can play WR regulars, without screwing up. So far, not doing so well, but then you never know when you'll run across a gem.


Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 1:07pm) *

QUOTE(Trick cyclist @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 5:30am) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 4:38am) *

QUOTE(carbuncle @ Tue 2nd March 2010, 9:09pm) *

Excellent work, but I would have given you extra points if you had titled your blog posting "Burning Mike Handel at both ends" …


pinch.gif

It sheds a lovely light! biggrin.gif


Hoo!

http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/20233

Good thing you dont edit on WQ, Prof. Roe! Or do you?

And Jon Awbrey gave this link and he didnt notice either.


I'm thinking about editing on WQ as "Quillercastingcouch". My main function being to audition Baxter socks, who are easily detectable by their predilection to correct poetry quotes. The purpose being to see if they can play WR regulars, without screwing up. So far, not doing so well, but then you never know when you'll run across a gem.


Any more of this wiki-pettiness and I'll revoke both of yer poet's' liscencseseses.

Jon tongue.gif

Posted by: Apathetic

QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 12:18pm) *

(2) a sign that Durova doesn't have a personal grudge against him yet (since he's not Greg)


you know that Durova isn't an admin anymore, right?

Posted by: SB_Johnny

QUOTE(Apathetic @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 1:55pm) *

QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 12:18pm) *

(2) a sign that Durova doesn't have a personal grudge against him yet (since he's not Greg)

you know that Durova isn't an admin anymore, right?

Strings to pull are often as effective as buttons to push. rolleyes.gif

Posted by: NuclearWarfare

QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 5:18pm) *

I actually think it's interesting that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/David_Lindsey isn't blocked "on principle", which is either (1) a positive sign that some lessons were learned from Greg's breach, (2) a sign that Durova doesn't have a personal grudge against him yet (since he's not Greg), or (3) they haven't gotten around to it yet.

Especially interesting because they seem rather block-happy the past week or two otherwise.


I don't know if David is technically banned or not, but I really don't care. And I think (hope?) most administrators are intelligent enough to know that a block would not accomplish anything here.

Posted by: Apathetic

QUOTE(NuclearWarfare @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 2:51pm) *

QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 5:18pm) *

I actually think it's interesting that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/David_Lindsey isn't blocked "on principle", which is either (1) a positive sign that some lessons were learned from Greg's breach, (2) a sign that Durova doesn't have a personal grudge against him yet (since he's not Greg), or (3) they haven't gotten around to it yet.

Especially interesting because they seem rather block-happy the past week or two otherwise.


I don't know if David is technically banned or not, but I really don't care. And I think (hope?) most administrators are intelligent enough to know that a block would not accomplish anything here.


I blocked http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:UTYVB8 as another cookie cutter sock, but I figured the named account could remain. Also as he assured there would be no more hoaxes...

Posted by: Trick cyclist

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 6:07pm) *

I'm thinking about editing on WQ as "Quillercastingcouch." ... The purpose being to see if they can play WR regulars, without screwing up.

A fascinating technique that I must copy. When youre caught with your pants (in the US sense and still more the British sense) down use lots of irrelevances and smoke and mirrors to hide the fact. Milton of course plays the part of the WR regular to perfection. Without screwing up? If he did that he wouldn't be such a convincing WR regular.

Posted by: thekohser

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/David_Lindsey, folks. Wikipedia will not be humiliated!

Posted by: The Joy

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 9:19pm) *

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/David_Lindsey, folks. Wikipedia will not be humiliated!


Well, it really doesn't need any help doing that, does it? happy.gif

Posted by: wikieyeay

It really wasn't necessary to include the printed (i.e. effectively unverifiable for the average user) references - people don't even bother to check URL references, and selecting a spurious reference from a paywalled site would be even more effective.

Posted by: RDH(Ghost In The Machine)

QUOTE(John Limey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 11:57am) *

I liked Zoloft's http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=28706&view=findpost&p=224333: "Wikipedia can't Handel the truth".


Yet another motto is born...and also one of my favorite ones too!

This was a masterwork of Wikipunkage!
Well done, Sirs!
applause.gif

Even if it goes ignored by the mainstream media, you have still won major respect points with a small but, dare I say, influential segment of cyberspace.
(have you considered Slashdoting and/or digging it?)

What amuses (but doesn't amaze) me most in this is the slow response of OTRS.
Are not such cases, fake or otherwise, their entire Raison D'etre?!

It only goes to further my assertion that, at best, OTRS is an inefficient customer complaints department; just leave a message, take a number and they'll get back with
you...eventually...maybe...your call is very important to us!
scream.gif






Posted by: dtobias

It's not, technically speaking, a BLP if the person doesn't exist; nonexistent people can hardly be "living".

Posted by: Zoloft

QUOTE(dtobias @ Fri 5th March 2010, 6:14pm) *

It's not, technically speaking, a BLP if the person doesn't exist; nonexistent people can hardly be "living".

It's not, technically speaking, an 'illegal drug sale' if the stuff turns out to be cornstarch, but it sure will tell you a lot about the person who buys it.

*Yes, I am aware that in some states, you can still be arrested for selling white powder if you represent it as an illegal drug.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(dtobias @ Fri 5th March 2010, 1:14pm) *

It's not, technically speaking, a BLP if the person doesn't exist; nonexistent people can hardly be "living".


It's not, technically speaking, an encyclopedia if the content's publisher is not treated as a publisher; non-published content can hardly be "reliable".

Posted by: John Limey

From our traffic logs, I noticed that someone has http://digg.com/tech_news/How_I_Got_A_Fake_Libelous_Article_on_Wikipedia_s_Front_Page the Handel story, so if you liked the story as much as I did and you have a Digg account, please go Digg it too and spread the word beyond the Wikipedia community.

Posted by: thekohser

Consider it dugged.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

Nice job. I particularly enjoyed the inclusion of "animal rights groups" as a source calling the beleaguered Mr. Handel a "murderer" and a "Nazi." To paraphrase Homer Simpson: "Animal rights groups... is there anything they don't know?" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive600#Mike_Handel_-_blatant_negative_BLP_hoax_made_DYK.21, for the record, is the archived ANI discussion.)

QUOTE(Trick cyclist @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 2:52pm) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 6:07pm) *

I'm thinking about editing on WQ as "Quillercastingcouch." ... The purpose being to see if they can play WR regulars, without screwing up.

A fascinating technique that I must copy. When youre caught with your pants (in the US sense and still more the British sense) down use lots of irrelevances and smoke and mirrors to hide the fact. Milton of course plays the part of the WR regular to perfection. Without screwing up? If he did that he wouldn't be such a convincing WR regular.
Mike, you must train your new IDs not to swing at every pitch.