Welcome to new members, Please join Options Rating

[blissyu2]

In light of the recent SlimVirgin scandal, and Wikipedia Review's heavy role in exposing the truth, a lot more people have been looking at Wikipedia Review posts, and we have had a number of new people sign up. To those people: welcome.

Signing up is risky, as Wikipedia currently lists Wikipedia Review as an attack site, hence if you join here, then they are well within their rights to ban you for joining here, and/or to use anything that you say on here against you on Wikipedia (including de-sysopping you, as they did for Guanaco, Karmafist and Everyking). Also note that Karmafist was banned because of a post that he made here as well. However, you can get around this by quite simply not revealing your Wikipedia username. This is up to you of course, and if you plan to make volatile attacks against Wikipedia Review, then its probably a good idea to use your Wikipedia username (Snowspinner never got in to any trouble for posting here, because he never said anything nice about Wikipedia Review). Of course, we won't be too impressed if your only reason to join here is to attack us, and we reserve the right to ban you if it gets out of hand. However, if you're already banned from Wikipedia, then you're free! Free to say what your username was, protest your ban, and so forth. The freedom of being banned!

So then why sign up? Over 75% of people who read this forum do not sign up. But one important reason to sign up is that then you can add your story to all of this. In relation to the current story, if you publish it on Wikipedia then it'll be deleted, if not perma-deleted (e.g. Kylu's posts) and in some cases they have even banned people for daring to post it (e.g. Hexrei). But here you can post freely and not worry about it being wiped.

Wikipedia has given Wikipedia Review a Parental Advisory Sticker, and we hope that you take that in the same way that you would if it was on a music compilation. It means that we are so good that Wikipedia has to censor us!

[Brutus]

I'm happy to have signed up. I don't have much to contribute yet, but I have some interesting stories about my experiences on wikipedia which I hope to share, when I get the time.

Although I was warned by an well know administrator I would be permanently banned if I were to do so. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)

I must admit, some Admin's over there are great, but then there are some Admins and editors who think they own the internet.

It's those ones who bring the place down.

I used to think Wikipedia was the greatest thing online since sliced bread, - and it could be.

But lately I'm thinking it's an online encylopedia run by amateurs for amateurs.

I hope I don't sound too negative.

[Derktar]

I'm happy to have signed up. I don't have much to contribute yet, but I have some interesting stories about my experiences on wikipedia which I hope to share, when I get the time.

Although I was warned by an well know administrator I would be permanently banned if I were to do so. :rolleyes:

I must admit, some Admin's over there are great, but then there are some Admins and editors who think they own the internet.

It's those ones who bring the place down.

I used to think Wikipedia was the greatest thing online since sliced bread, - and it could be.

But lately I'm thinking it's an online encylopedia run by amateurs for amateurs.

I hope I don't sound too negative.

Et tu Brutus?

Sorry bad pun, but now that it's behind us...

Your experiences are not unique unfortunately, fear is a powerful motivator and we're glad you have at least seen the light.

Welcome to the Review and enjoy your stay!

[guy]

I hope I don't sound too negative.

No, you certainly don't. Welcome.

[Why-o-y]

Please help me. What the heck is going on on Wikipedia? I'm an emotional person, sure, but by-gone-it, I'm human and smart by the standards. I also have a few college degrees! Why do they have kids in charge of the community? Kids that have no life experience, nevermind edjumacation, and think they know-it=all! I know, most of us have been that age once. But, come-on, how can a 20-year-old make a good arbiter. Let alone and 13-year-old admin. Sure there are younin's (savants) that are "special" in that they are beyond their age. But, isn't that a minority?!!!?

Isn't it true that the average IQ is a double digit one? Doesn't that mean that most people are stupid?

My god, I think I've just experienced a segment in past history, like in the Nazi era. Someone please help me!

Please be gentle, because I'm emotional...but god-dammit. I can take it, I can say "Fuck" and "moron" without flinching. I can take constructive criticism from those I respect and know are much smarter than I. (Not too many, because my IQ is very high, but my EQ is low.)

I can take the vandals saying you're gay, and you're mother is fat, etc. But, I cannot take those who are in "power" ie. admins, clerks, whatever who are fucking insane.

Just a rant. Is there a rant forum? Will I be blocked for "cussing" here?

Your's truly,
Disillusioned emotional drama troll who cannot stand the hypocrisy and the Wiki-way!
Why-o-y

This post has been edited by Why-o-y:

[guy]

Welcome Why-o-y.

Wikipedia is run by youngsters because they are the people with the time and inclination to do the sort of things that help people become admins. And it becomes self-reinforcing; because that is the sort of person who runs things, similar people are welcomed and encouraged.

The average IQ is supposed to be 100 by definitio, though that was probably calibrated decades ago and maybe people have changed. Still, 50% of people must be below average.

[Why-o-y]

It's also for those with little time left. Having a terminal illness is no fun, I'd rather go out with a bang. Even if it's only on Wikipedia. My situation does not allow me to go outside. I've had a good life though.

This post has been edited by Why-o-y:

[GlassBeadGame]

Please help me. What the heck is going on on Wikipedia? I'm an emotional person, sure, but by-gone-it, I'm human and smart by the standards. I also have a few college degrees! Why do they have kids in charge of the community? Kids that have no life experience, nevermind edjumacation, and think they know-it=all! I know, most of us have been that age once. But, come-on, how can a 20-year-old make a good arbiter. Let alone and 13-year-old admin. Sure there are younin's (savants) that are "special" in that they are beyond their age. But, isn't that a minority?!!!?

Isn't it true that the average IQ is a double digit one? Doesn't that mean that most people are stupid?

My god, I think I've just experienced a segment in past history, like in the Nazi era. Someone please help me!

Please be gentle, because I'm emotional...but god-dammit. I can take it, I can say "Fuck" and "moron" without flinching. I can take constructive criticism from those I respect and know are much smarter than I. (Not too many, because my IQ is very high, but my EQ is low.)

I can take the vandals saying you're gay, and you're mother is fat, etc. But, I cannot take those who are in "power" ie. admins, clerks, whatever who are fucking insane.

Just a rant. Is there a rant forum? Will I be blocked for "cussing" here?

Your's truly,
Disillusioned emotional drama troll who cannot stand the hypocrisy and the Wiki-way!
Why-o-y

There is a distasteful indignity inflicted by 15 years olds with authority running roughshod over well educated adults. This has been noted here by others and is an active and fruitful aspect of criticism of Wikipedia. You certainly don't have to be a "troll" to chaff under those conditions. Welcome to WR Why-o-y.

[Jonny Cache]

It's also for those with little time left. Having a terminal illness is no fun, I'd rather go out with a bang. Even if it's only on Wikipedia. My situation does not allow me to go outside. I've had a good life though.

That's what it's all about, is it not? — sneaking a fragment of a semblance of what you wore out your life to learn past the dim hitcher on the road up ahead, the consolation prize, the vicarious immortality of leaving a legacy, the hope that it wouldn't be totally wasted if you could leave humanity one bit wiser for having been.

Jon Awbrey

[Somey]

Why do they have kids in charge of the community? Kids that have no life experience, nevermind edjumacation, and think they know-it=all! I know, most of us have been that age once. But, come-on, how can a 20-year-old make a good arbiter. Let alone and 13-year-old admin.

Would that it were only the "kids" showing poor judgement and promoting themselves without the benefit of qualifications... If it were just them, they might eventually be able to get the situation relatively under control.

I also suspect there are internet forums devoted to discussing the ideal way to go out with a bang, but I couldn't personally recommend one...? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smiling.gif)

[Moulton]

I also suspect there are internet forums devoted to discussing the ideal way to go out with a bang, but I couldn't personally recommend one...?

Writing a personal memoir on a blog is probably a good option.

[LessHorrid vanU]

It's also for those with little time left. Having a terminal illness is no fun, I'd rather go out with a bang. Even if it's only on Wikipedia. My situation does not allow me to go outside. I've had a good life though.

Hmmmmm... I think I may well have interacted with you over at WP; and I may just be one of the "insane admins" you refer to - although I don't fit the rest of the criteria. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) Whatever, welcome... If you are who I am thinking of, I think that that stuff should stay over there - here I'm just another poster. If you ain't, then - here I'm just another poster.

Cheers.

[mbilitatu]

I tried to post to Wiki for about 10 months. I didn't contribute that much, because every time I did it was a fight. Someone with absolute ignorance about the topic but far more time and dedication to the fight made my efforts a phenomenal waste of time. It could take days to get a single sentence "approved", so any serious contribution seemed impossible.

What makes my situation more difficult is that I am a PhD research scientist who also has a decades long history of studying shamanism. I've worked around the world with some very powerful healers and have had jaw dropping, mind blowing experiences. And I have never had to let go of my scientific training during any shamanic work. In fact, my intellectual mindset has been a great ally in deepening the experience.

But ... as anyone who comes within a hundred miles of wiki knows ... any contribution to anything whose intellectual tradition is not grounded in the western scientific method is routinely pounded by the pseudo-skeptic mafia as fringe, pseudoscience, quackery and so on. And in the most frustrating of ironies, the pseudo-skeptic mafia uses false logic, bad science, political tactics and outright religious passion to do the pounding. In my opinion.

So ... I'm not totally certain why I'm here. Maybe to vent. Maybe to be heard. Maybe to see if there is a possibility to make a difference. Maybe to learn something. I was embroiled in one idiotic discussion and another request for deletion, and presumably those fights are still going on, but I don't have the desire to continue those fights and do not plan to bring them up here. I've researched the name involved and know that he's a famous, self-appointed guardian of the Wiki reality and he will undoubtedly outlast me. So be it.

Thank you for creating this venue. I have a couple ideas for discussions that might be interesting. We'll see.

[Anonymous editor]

funny to read the first post in light of what we now know and in light of what has happened recently.

This post has been edited by Anonymous editor:

[tarantino]

Welcome to the Review mbilitatu. Your experience at WP is not unusual.

[GlassBeadGame]

I tried to post to Wiki for about 10 months. I didn't contribute that much, because every time I did it was a fight. Someone with absolute ignorance about the topic but far more time and dedication to the fight made my efforts a phenomenal waste of time. It could take days to get a single sentence "approved", so any serious contribution seemed impossible.

What makes my situation more difficult is that I am a PhD research scientist who also has a decades long history of studying shamanism. I've worked around the world with some very powerful healers and have had jaw dropping, mind blowing experiences. And I have never had to let go of my scientific training during any shamanic work. In fact, my intellectual mindset has been a great ally in deepening the experience.

But ... as anyone who comes within a hundred miles of wiki knows ... any contribution to anything whose intellectual tradition is not grounded in the western scientific method is routinely pounded by the pseudo-skeptic mafia as fringe, pseudoscience, quackery and so on. And in the most frustrating of ironies, the pseudo-skeptic mafia uses false logic, bad science, political tactics and outright religious passion to do the pounding. In my opinion.

So ... I'm not totally certain why I'm here. Maybe to vent. Maybe to be heard. Maybe to see if there is a possibility to make a difference. Maybe to learn something. I was embroiled in one idiotic discussion and another request for deletion, and presumably those fights are still going on, but I don't have the desire to continue those fights and do not plan to bring them up here. I've researched the name involved and know that he's a famous, self-appointed guardian of the Wiki reality and he will undoubtedly outlast me. So be it.

Thank you for creating this venue. I have a couple ideas for discussions that might be interesting. We'll see.

Welcome mbilitatu. We have a resident shaman, who will be by soon to introduce himself. I think you will find significant support for your concerns about the use of harsh means to enforce the orthodoxy of entrenched and entitled editors.

[Peter Damian]

Signing up is risky, as Wikipedia currently lists Wikipedia Review as an attack site, hence if you join here, then they are well within their rights to ban you for joining here, and/or to use anything that you say on here against you on Wikipedia (including de-sysopping you, as they did for Guanaco, Karmafist and Everyking). Also note that Karmafist was banned because of a post that he made here as well.

Oi don't forget me mate personally banned by Jimbo for a mildly insulting comment against his minions made here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Peter_Damian

But ... as anyone who comes within a hundred miles of wiki knows ... any contribution to anything whose intellectual tradition is not grounded in the western scientific method is routinely pounded by the pseudo-skeptic mafia as fringe, pseudoscience, quackery and so on.

And rightly so in my view. In this house there are many mansions.

[AlioTheFool]

Hello everyone.

Herschel was kind enough to register my account for me.

[Fritz]

Just wanted to say hello somewhere without drawing attention to myself with a new topic.

I've been lurking around for a while, and am a little-known admin on Wikipedia, although I've been mentioned in a couple of threads here. Although I've not become known for my admin stuff, I inadvertantly seem to have started the Sarah Palin wheelwar, and caused a riot against bot-created articles. And those two items may have been embellished to make me seem more interesting.

I've lurked here for a while, reading a fair bit, and you've convinced me of some problems with Wikipedia beyond those I could identify myself. I'm not out to destroy Wikipedia, just like many of you, but I am interested in trying to explore how things could be changed. Alas, I lack the clout to inspire others, but hopefully every voice counts.

[Son of a Yeti]

The average IQ is supposed to be 100 by definitio, though that was probably calibrated decades ago and maybe people have changed. Still, 50% of people must be below average.

I'm surprised no one corrected yet this false statement. It would be true if it were the median, not the average.

As far as I know IQ 100 was supposed to be the average when it was invented. And it is not true that 50% people need to be below the average.

I'll give you an example.

Let's imagine a small community of Adam, Beth, Cecil, David and Sophia. Their IQs are:

Adam 70
Beth 75
Cecil 80
David 95
Sophia 180

The average is 100 (while the median is 80).

How many people are below the average? Four out of five or 80%.

It can be true about intelligence. But it is certainly true in many societies about wealth - when a small group of people has a lion share of property.

This post has been edited by Son of a Yeti:

[Cedric]

I've lurked here for a while, reading a fair bit, and you've convinced me of some problems with Wikipedia beyond those I could identify myself. I'm not out to destroy Wikipedia, just like many of you, but I am interested in trying to explore how things could be changed. Alas, I lack the clout to inspire others, but hopefully every voice counts.

Indeed, pretty much all of us here at WR do not favor taking action to destroy Wikipedia, not even those of us (like myself) who think that its destruction would be a good thing. As you read on, you should discover that the idea that we are plotting such action is just more BADSITES propaganda (as you already seem to be learning). WP is well along in the process of destroying itself. Affirmative action taken to "destroy" WP would find little if any favor here because 1) it's useless, 2) if discovered, it would be a needless distraction, and 3) anyhow, it could never measure up to the efforts of the cabalistas who are witlessly destroying WP from within.

When it comes to this, we here at WR prefer to just make popcorn. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/popcorn.gif)

[AGK]

Thanks for the welcome.

I created my account here some months ago mostly on a point of principle: I wished at that time to make a quiet stand against the view that Wikipedia Review is a dark netherworld to be repressed, dismissed, and ignored. That principle is one I continue to believe in: Wikipedia is badly in need of a forum for criticism. WR has the potential to be that forum, if only the poisoning by excessively extreme views can be worked around.

Following Fritzpoll's lead, above, I'll note that I'm a neutral lurker, and strive to maintain that image. I suspect I have a lot to say, however: I'm an ArbCom clerk, a MedCom member, and an enwiki administrator. Too many "influential" editors are unwilling to associate with WR, and I therefore also suspect that this may not be my last post. ;-)

We shall see.

Many thanks again for the welcome.

[Unrepentant Vandal]

Thanks for the welcome.

I created my account here some months ago mostly on a point of principle: I wished at that time to make a quiet stand against the view that Wikipedia Review is a dark netherworld to be repressed, dismissed, and ignored. That principle is one I continue to believe in: Wikipedia is badly in need of a forum for criticism. WR has the potential to be that forum, if only the poisoning by excessively extreme views can be worked around.

Following Fritzpoll's lead, above, I'll note that I'm a neutral lurker, and strive to maintain that image. I suspect I have a lot to say, however: I'm an ArbCom clerk, a MedCom member, and an enwiki administrator. Too many "influential" editors are unwilling to associate with WR, and I therefore also suspect that this may not be my last post. ;-)

We shall see.

Many thanks again for the welcome.

Welcome.

Anyone interested in Scottish trains can't be all bad (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

[GlassBeadGame]

Thanks for the welcome.

I created my account here some months ago mostly on a point of principle: I wished at that time to make a quiet stand against the view that Wikipedia Review is a dark netherworld to be repressed, dismissed, and ignored. That principle is one I continue to believe in: Wikipedia is badly in need of a forum for criticism. WR has the potential to be that forum, if only the poisoning by excessively extreme views can be worked around.

Following Fritzpoll's lead, above, I'll note that I'm a neutral lurker, and strive to maintain that image. I suspect I have a lot to say, however: I'm an ArbCom clerk, a MedCom member, and an enwiki administrator. Too many "influential" editors are unwilling to associate with WR, and I therefore also suspect that this may not be my last post. ;-)

We shall see.

Many thanks again for the welcome.

Welcome to WR. I would suggest you take the time to carefully read and come to understand the positions of what you say are "extreme" posters. Many of us WR "hardliners" have views (responsibility/ accountability) that would be very mainstream outside of WP. The only people currently with nutter views are a few isolated outliers and some WP fanatic loyalists. You will also need to establish your ideas with the quality of your contributions here. Your stated "credentials" will not possess as much currency as you might hope.

[Milton Roe]

Many of us WR "hardliners" have views (responsibility/ accountability) that would be very mainstream outside of WP.

Exactly. That's a thought that is worthy of enough repetition that it ought to be part of our logo occassionally, or our guest sign-in package.

Welcome.

[AGK]

Welcome to WR. I would suggest you take the time to carefully read and come to understand the positions of what you say are "extreme" posters. Many of us WR "hardliners" have views (responsibility/ accountability) that would be very mainstream outside of WP. The only people currently with nutter views are a few isolated outliers and some WP fanatic loyalists. You will also need to establish your ideas with the quality of your contributions here. Your stated "credentials" will not possess as much currency as you might hope.

I make no attempt at using my "credentials" as bargaining chips for, well, for anything. I was expressing my surprise at the number of editors who do have those credentials and yet do not contribute or, indeed, seem to follow developments here. Call it "thinking aloud," I suppose.

I would agree with your colouring of the majority of WR's "extreme" views as rather ordinary outside of Wikipedia itself. When Wikipedia comes up in the course of everyday conversation (which it rarely does, admittedly), the overwhelming impression is that it is "unreliable" or "inaccurate." No opinion is ever expressed on the community—which, to the reader, is often invisible—but I would suspect many of them would share WR's view that it is a bureaucratic and unaccountable oligarchy. I disagree, of course, but, as a contributor to Wikipedia and a member of that oligarchy, I'm naturally biased.

I do maintain, however, that a proportion of opinions expressed here on WR are those of individuals disillusioned with Wikipedia as a result of personal experiences. (I think primarily here of banned editors with a qualm over Wikipedia administrator X, Y, or Z.)

[gomi]

I do maintain, however, that a proportion of opinions expressed here on WR are those of individuals disillusioned with Wikipedia as a result of personal experiences. (I think primarily here of banned editors with a qualm over Wikipedia administrator X, Y, or Z.)

While many come here as a result of being banned -- often for no good reason, as Wikipedia bans people at more-or-less the drop of a hat -- but also arrive with or quickly adopt a more generalized mistrust of Wikipedia.

Some Reviewers are disillusioned at the community, and some are disillusioned over the lost opportunity of a real online encyclopedia, but either way, being banned hardly ever results in simply "a qualm" over a particular admin. While the blood sport of pointing out the worst abuses of the many abusive admins is good fun and diverting, the real criticism of Wikipedia here for the last year or more concerns its ultimate failure as both a community and an encyclopedia, not the small-minded antics of the individuals guards in the asylum.

[Luís Henrique]

Hello... newbie here. What the initiation rites are?

I have found this message board by searching for online criticism of Wikipedia, after some weird experiences there. I am particularly interested in discussing the use of non-English sources in articles about history and society of foreign countries - especially Brazil -, and the existence of little cabals controlling those articles.

I'm Brazilian, 51, civil servant, have a History degree (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul), leftist political activist (Marxist, Workers Party), live in Brasília, have lived in Porto Alegre and Rio de Janeiro. My main general interests are, in no particular order, military history, Marxist theory, technologic history, linguistics, fictional literature.

Luís Henrique

[UseOnceAndDestroy]

Hello... newbie here.

Welcome, Luís.

What the initiation rites are?

I think you just completed them.

I have found this message board by searching for online criticism of Wikipedia, after some weird experiences there. I am particularly interested in discussing the use of non-English sources in articles about history and society of foreign countries - especially Brazil -, and the existence of little cabals controlling those articles.

Recommend you look at a few of the current and older threads, and contribute from your own experience. Problems arising where WP editors lack knowledge/sense about other countries crop up sometimes - see for example http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=17731, and a personal favourite of mine, http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=15472

[Moulton]

What the initiation rites are?

1. Sign the Disloyalty Oath.

2. Swear off Kool Aid.

3. Enter a Twelve Step Program to learn how to solve Greek Letter Rebus Puzzles.

[Son of a Yeti]

Hello... newbie here. What the initiation rites are?

Dunno. Denounce at least three WP admins and one Arbcom member?

[Jon Awbrey]

Hello … newbie here. What the initiation rites are?

I have found this message board by searching for online criticism of Wikipedia, after some weird experiences there. I am particularly interested in discussing the use of non-English sources in articles about history and society of foreign countries — especially Brazil —, and the existence of little cabals controlling those articles.

I'm Brazilian, 51, civil servant, have a History degree (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul), leftist political activist (Marxist, Workers Party), live in Brasília, have lived in Porto Alegre and Rio de Janeiro. My main general interests are, in no particular order, military history, Marxist theory, technologic history, linguistics, fictional literature.

Luís Henrique

I had some rather bizarre experiences myself on the Portuguese Wikipedia, as User:JonAwbrey, after I discovered that some people had translated a few of my English Wikipedia articles there, and I went to help update them.

I never got clear on how many Portuguese Wikipedias there were, but they seemed to spend a lot of time fighting over dialect issues, even worse than UK vs. US idiots, er, idioms.

Could you shed some light on that?

Mods, please feel free split stuff off that doesn't belong on FAQ.

Jon Awbrey

[Milton Roe]

Hello... newbie here. What the initiation rites are?

(IMG:http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll191/Shrlocc/spank.gif)

Next, post something like:
(IMG:http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll191/Shrlocc/hitleryouth.jpg)
That jerks chains a lot. But I see you already did that. Argentinian White Race connection very clever. Boys from Brazil next? It's all in the nuance. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

[Luís Henrique]

Hello... newbie here. What the initiation rites are?

(IMG:http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll191/Shrlocc/spank.gif)

Next, post something like:
(IMG:http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll191/Shrlocc/hitleryouth.jpg)
That jerks chains a lot. But I see you already did that. Argentinian White Race connection very clever. Boys from Brazil next? It's all in the nuance. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

Do you have a source that these people are Aryan?

Some of them look Bantu-Uralian to me.

Luís Henrique

[Milton Roe]

Hello... newbie here. What the initiation rites are?

(IMG:http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll191/Shrlocc/spank.gif)

Next, post something like:
(IMG:http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll191/Shrlocc/hitleryouth.jpg)
That jerks chains a lot. But I see you already did that. Argentinian White Race connection very clever. Boys from Brazil next? It's all in the nuance. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

Do you have a source that these people are Aryan?

Some of them look Bantu-Uralian to me.

Luís Henrique

It's not a well-defined term. Labeling people with non-well defined terms leads to unnecessary arguments.

Hell, labeling ANYTHING with non-well-defined terms leads to arguments.

[Luís Henrique]

It's not a well-defined term. Labeling people with non-well defined terms leads to unnecessary arguments.

And, arguably, to World Wars.

Hell, labeling ANYTHING with non-well-defined terms leads to arguments.

Is "non-well-defined" a well defined term?

Luís Henrique

[Milton Roe]

It's not a well-defined term. Labeling people with non-well defined terms leads to unnecessary arguments.

And, arguably, to World Wars.

Hell, labeling ANYTHING with non-well-defined terms leads to arguments.

Is "non-well-defined" a well defined term?

Luís Henrique

No it isn't. Would you like to have an argument?

[Luís Henrique]

No it isn't. Would you like to have an argument?

It would prove your point, wouldn't it? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

Luís Henrique

[Milton Roe]

No it isn't. Would you like to have an argument?

It would prove your point, wouldn't it? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

Luís Henrique

No, it wouldn't!

[Luís Henrique]

No, it wouldn't!

But if I nuked you, it would make my point...

Luís Henrique

[LamontStormstar]

I tried to post to Wiki for about 10 months. I didn't contribute that much, because every time I did it was a fight. Someone with absolute ignorance about the topic but far more time and dedication to the fight made my efforts a phenomenal waste of time. It could take days to get a single sentence "approved", so any serious contribution seemed impossible.

What makes my situation more difficult is that I am a PhD research scientist who also has a decades long history of studying shamanism. I've worked around the world with some very powerful healers and have had jaw dropping, mind blowing experiences. And I have never had to let go of my scientific training during any shamanic work. In fact, my intellectual mindset has been a great ally in deepening the experience.

But ... as anyone who comes within a hundred miles of wiki knows ... any contribution to anything whose intellectual tradition is not grounded in the western scientific method is routinely pounded by the pseudo-skeptic mafia as fringe, pseudoscience, quackery and so on. And in the most frustrating of ironies, the pseudo-skeptic mafia uses false logic, bad science, political tactics and outright religious passion to do the pounding. In my opinion.

So ... I'm not totally certain why I'm here. Maybe to vent. Maybe to be heard. Maybe to see if there is a possibility to make a difference. Maybe to learn something. I was embroiled in one idiotic discussion and another request for deletion, and presumably those fights are still going on, but I don't have the desire to continue those fights and do not plan to bring them up here. I've researched the name involved and know that he's a famous, self-appointed guardian of the Wiki reality and he will undoubtedly outlast me. So be it.

Thank you for creating this venue. I have a couple ideas for discussions that might be interesting. We'll see.

That's my experience, too. I'm of the opinion that these people do it just to harass others and most people on that site are like that, they just visit it to game the system not to help the site but to harass others. I recently read a thread on this forum about a guy called Chris-chan and the average Wikipedian makes Chris-chan look like one of the coolest people in the world by comparison.

[Jon Awbrey]

Moderators,

I think it's time to rewrite a Welcome to New Members — this one seems calculated to be about as inviting as a stale wiki-φart hanging round the room — unpin this mess and depose all or most of it to the Lounge or Tarpit.

Thanx,

Jon

[Son of a Yeti]

I tried to post to Wiki for about 10 months. I didn't contribute that much, because every time I did it was a fight. Someone with absolute ignorance about the topic but far more time and dedication to the fight made my efforts a phenomenal waste of time. It could take days to get a single sentence "approved", so any serious contribution seemed impossible.

What makes my situation more difficult is that I am a PhD research scientist who also has a decades long history of studying shamanism.

Do you really think you know more about shamanism than the practicing shamans? WP is full of them. They are called "admins" over there.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/evilgrin.gif)

[Milton Roe]

I tried to post to Wiki for about 10 months. I didn't contribute that much, because every time I did it was a fight. Someone with absolute ignorance about the topic but far more time and dedication to the fight made my efforts a phenomenal waste of time. It could take days to get a single sentence "approved", so any serious contribution seemed impossible.

What makes my situation more difficult is that I am a PhD research scientist who also has a decades long history of studying shamanism.

Do you really think you know more about shamanism than the practicing shamans? WP is full of them. They are called "admins" over there.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/evilgrin.gif)

Perhaps you are confusing shamanism with shamism? Though I admit that Jimbo's suggestion to Rachel Marsden that he could interceed with the proper people to fix up her BLP, before banging her, was sort of a cross between both. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/yecch.gif)

[Neo]

In light of the recent SlimVirgin scandal, and Wikipedia Review's heavy role in exposing the truth, a lot more people have been looking at Wikipedia Review posts, and we have had a number of new people sign up. To those people: welcome.

Signing up is risky, as Wikipedia currently lists Wikipedia Review as an attack site, hence if you join here, then they are well within their rights to ban you for joining here, and/or to use anything that you say on here against you on Wikipedia (including de-sysopping you, as they did for Guanaco, Karmafist and Everyking). Also note that Karmafist was banned because of a post that he made here as well. However, you can get around this by quite simply not revealing your Wikipedia username. This is up to you of course, and if you plan to make volatile attacks against Wikipedia Review, then its probably a good idea to use your Wikipedia username (Snowspinner never got in to any trouble for posting here, because he never said anything nice about Wikipedia Review). Of course, we won't be too impressed if your only reason to join here is to attack us, and we reserve the right to ban you if it gets out of hand. However, if you're already banned from Wikipedia, then you're free! Free to say what your username was, protest your ban, and so forth. The freedom of being banned!

So then why sign up? Over 75% of people who read this forum do not sign up. But one important reason to sign up is that then you can add your story to all of this. In relation to the current story, if you publish it on Wikipedia then it'll be deleted, if not perma-deleted (e.g. Kylu's posts) and in some cases they have even banned people for daring to post it (e.g. Hexrei). But here you can post freely and not worry about it being wiped.

Wikipedia has given Wikipedia Review a Parental Advisory Sticker, and we hope that you take that in the same way that you would if it was on a music compilation. It means that we are so good that Wikipedia has to censor us!

I'm happy to have signed up too. from my experience on Wikipedia, it appears that they take themselves MUCH to seriously and have lots to learn about the word "community" which, considering the lack thereof on Wikipedia is a joke ~ even today.

The common experience most Wikipedia users have had is that the system there seems to collapse on itself every couple of months. Moreover, Wikipedia hates experts in ANY field, which is usually seen Wiki admins pretending to be able to "overule" something based on a person's "virtual behavior" while at the same time ignoring all the rude activity over there.

Wikipedia is already known for not being a site one can trust for good information. Most people I know who've used Wikipedia and had the experience of trial and error via the poison penners on that site admit to not using or trusting the information based on the fact that Wikipedia does not monitior it's own sight very well (but loves to monitor sites that are critical of Wikipedia) such as some of the admins who read this site daily, and come to complain about Wikipedia here out of fear of being banned from the "Wikipedia community" (if there is such a thing) forever.

What Jimbo Wales misses is a touch of the real world. What Wikipedia has become is an "exclusive" virtual world of its own where haters, poison-penners, and all manner of "expert-haters" in all fields can attack others whom they personally disagree with (without having to personally face those they disagree with.)

Banning, and playing all sorts of "head games" by Wikipedia admins really has the effect of driving down the reliability of Wikipedia. Jimbo should have anticipated this, and corrected it at least three years ago, when all the witch-hunts of hearings were peaking in the years 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008.

Many users who were positive members of Wikipedia got turned off from the site, and this is now in the thousands. You see, what happens is that when you have a group of editors/administrators who are not screened well, they begin to sit on their own fiefdoms, and create cliques, which is what has happened with Wikipedia over the years.

Naturally, a site like this rises, and of course, there are those who continue to use Wikipedia, but who are free to express the problems over there without fear of being shouted down and thrown out of the "community" ~ which isn't a community in reality, but a collection of many (not all, but lots) of Wiki users/editors/admins who just are anti-social when it comes to "community."

One can easily disagree without being disagreeable, but Jimbo Wales hasn't seen that many of th people he has "hired" to manage Wikipedia, most likely are not very good at communcating with others, and have very low tolerance values to be able to actually discern what an issue is without making it so convoluted, to the point of attacking the honest user for doing the very thing that Wikipedia's own guildlines state should be done.

Wikipedia's own admins don't follow their own rules ~ especially being kind to newcomers. They also do not tutor well at all. There is the introductory "hello" ~ and then that's that. You are on your own, and often, this means that the user is open to the poison penners, sharks, and all those who continue to edit pages on Wikipedia as if they actually "own" the very knowledge they edit.

One can certainly have the right to one's own opinions ~ but not to one's own facts. And that is what Wikipedia doesn't get.

[Universe Daily]

Hi all. Some interesting comments. I myself joined wikipedia many years ago with no idea what it was. I surfed in and scanned the first few pages of rules(they are longer than encyclopedia brittanica) to get a gist of what was going on.

It said feel free to dive in and don't worry about making mistakes. So I did.

This included adding a few links to the external link sections or indeed creating such a section. Now I don't know who gets to decide which links are relevant and which aren't but I was soon banned and called a vandal.

I worked in the security industry for over a decade. Often chasing down real vandals. You know, kids who like to smash public toilets and spray paint graffiti on trains. Calling me a Vandal is a great way to get a black eye. Unfortunately the cowards over at Wikipedia turned down my offers of a personal one on one meeting to settle matters.

Its so easy to insult people online isn't it.

So I decided if I was going to be called a Vandal then I'd better be the best Vandal possible to earn the title. I hate wikipedia and vandalise it every opportunity I get now. Wikipedian administrators are lying scum. Despite the fact that most people here don't want to see wikipedia destroyed I'm of a different mind on the matter. But I think it will self destruct at some point. Possibly after somebody sues it.

My user name was Universe_Daily. Tried to correct a number of lies about me on that user page but every time I do I'm just banned again.

Thankyou for creating a wonderful source of interesting news concerning Jimmy Wales and Wikipedia. Thank you also for allowing me to join your discussions.

This post has been edited by JimmyWales.Org:

[Daxx]

Hello all,

I've had experience of Wikipedia on-and-off for years; I started editing mostly as an IP editor but stopped after a while because despite making more of an effort to work within the policies than many editors, and trying to be civil and reasonable, the rudeness I was treated with as an IP editor simply made me uncomfortable and unwilling to edit. I've never been much for participating in the MMORPGism inherent to a lot of editing over there, but unfortunately got hooked on the Wikipedia Soap Opera before I knew what happened.

I've been reading WR for quite some time now but I decided to join mostly so I can go "behind the scenes" as it were with the non-public fora; and who knows - maybe I'll have something to contribute as well. I can't promise insightful commentary, since I'm more of a voyeur than a gadfly, but I'll try if the situation takes me. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

-Daxx

[Somey]

I've been reading WR for quite some time now but I decided to join mostly so I can go "behind the scenes" as it were with the non-public fora; and who knows - maybe I'll have something to contribute as well. I can't promise insightful commentary, since I'm more of a voyeur than a gadfly, but I'll try if the situation takes me. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Welcome to WR, Mr. Daxx... I guess this might be as good a time as any to apologize to all new members for our decision to hide the non-public forums from them until they make at least 5 posts.

Sorry about that!

[Daxx]

I've been reading WR for quite some time now but I decided to join mostly so I can go "behind the scenes" as it were with the non-public fora; and who knows - maybe I'll have something to contribute as well. I can't promise insightful commentary, since I'm more of a voyeur than a gadfly, but I'll try if the situation takes me. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Welcome to WR, Mr. Daxx... I guess this might be as good a time as any to apologize to all new members for our decision to hide the non-public forums from them until they make at least 5 posts.

Sorry about that!

No problem at all; I think it's a reasonable decision. Frankly there's a lot to wikipolitics which is just downright malicious and doesn't need to be made available for public consumption, and five posts isn't too onerous.

Thanks for the welcome.

[A Horse With No Name]

I've been reading WR for quite some time now but I decided to join mostly so I can go "behind the scenes" as it were with the non-public fora; and who knows - maybe I'll have something to contribute as well. I can't promise insightful commentary, since I'm more of a voyeur than a gadfly, but I'll try if the situation takes me. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Welcome to WR, Mr. Daxx... I guess this might be as good a time as any to apologize to all new members for our decision to hide the non-public forums from them until they make at least 5 posts.

Sorry about that!

No problem at all; I think it's a reasonable decision. Frankly there's a lot to wikipolitics which is just downright malicious and doesn't need to be made available for public consumption, and five posts isn't too onerous.

Thanks for the welcome.

Daxx, I think that this video will help you understand what to expect from WR and how to participate in our discussions. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

[TheySeeMeTrollin]

But lately I'm thinking it's an online encylopedia run by amateurs for amateurs.

That last line said it all for me.

[Tower]

I'm a newcomer too, just an observer of wikipedia's politics.

[Appleby]

Hi I thought I'd try to inject some comments from a semi-detached angle. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

[Jim]

Hello

Just posting a reply to confirm that I can (just signed up)

Sorry if it's the wrong place.

Jim

[Tintomara]

Hi all!

Hmm...is there some sort of autoconfirmed mechanism that I'm missing here? Seeing as how I'm not allowed to view my own profile or anything...

[gomi]

Hi all!

Hmm...is there some sort of autoconfirmed mechanism that I'm missing here? Seeing as how I'm not allowed to view my own profile or anything...

Sort of. Post a few times, making salient, insightful points, and I'm sure things will sort themselves out. In any case, welcome!

[Appleby]

Hi all!

Hmm...is there some sort of autoconfirmed mechanism that I'm missing here? Seeing as how I'm not allowed to view my own profile or anything...

Yes, I had the same problem but it magically cleared up after a few posts. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

[Tintomara]

Hi all!

Hmm...is there some sort of autoconfirmed mechanism that I'm missing here? Seeing as how I'm not allowed to view my own profile or anything...

Sort of. Post a few times, making salient, insightful points, and I'm sure things will sort themselves out. In any case, welcome!

Okay, thanks. The Random article button seems to be is missing though...

[Nine]

Hello everyone. Been on and off WP for ages really. I keep kidding myself that it's just me being precious about endless bitching and all the politics.

But it's not, is it? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

Stay safe wherever you are.

[Jon Awbrey]

Hello everyone. Been on and off WP for ages really. I keep kidding myself that it's just me being precious about endless bitching and all the politics.

But it's not, is it? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

Stay safe wherever you are.

Greetings, Old Niner (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/oldtimer.gif)

There must be a 7 of 9 joke in here somewhere, but I'm late for a very important date, so I'll just throw it out to the group.

Jon (IMG:http://wikipediareview.com/stimg9x0b4fsr2/1/folder_post_icons/icon9.gif)

[Nine]

Hello everyone. Been on and off WP for ages really. I keep kidding myself that it's just me being precious about endless bitching and all the politics.

But it's not, is it? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

Stay safe wherever you are.

Greetings, Old Niner (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/oldtimer.gif)

There must be a 7 of 9 joke in here somewhere, but I'm late for a very important date, so I'll just throw it out to the group.

Jon (IMG:http://wikipediareview.com/stimg9x0b4fsr2/1/folder_post_icons/icon9.gif)

There aren't many of us 'single number' editors left; just me, 2 and 7 I think.

Thanks for the welcome Jon - enjoy 'the important date'!

[Julie]

I wanted to take a moment to introduce myself and in an exercise of full disclosure explain my rationale for joining this community. First of all, my name is Julie and I am studying the psychology of subcultures. What does that mean exactly? I study subcultures that exist within imagined communities found on the internet.

I have no association with Wikipedia or the foundation except that I find the WP subculture to be incredibly fascinating and I think that it can be a valuable tool to helping me better understand the dynamics of imagined communities.

One of the hardest things about observing subcultures is that I have to find a way to distinguish the signal from the noise and that’s very hard to do that when most of the noise is disguised as signal. The most effective, but also most difficult way to develop an ethnography is through a combination of observations and self-reporting techniques. The Wikipedia subculture is far too cloistered and insular to be able to accurately observe them and I think that we can pretty much all agree that most self-reporting exercises will be incredibly slanted. I have been reading the forums on Wikipedia Review for about three weeks and finally decided that the only way for me to get an honest view of the Wikipedia subculture is from people who have no vested interest in maintaining a public perception. In other words, I am going to another tribe to learn more about the tribe I really want to study.

Cultural anthropologists must be unbiased, but all that means in regards to this community is that I am not here to judge the Wikipedia subculture.

I will make a few promises to this community and I hope that you will accept them, even if you have no reason to do so. I will not reveal any information that I gather to anyone except for my advisor. If I think that my observations may be of any assistance to this community, I will hand them over to you all (the community as a whole) to use as you see fit. That all being said, I am an incredibly opinionated individual and will probably find myself in a situation where I want to post and just might do so with the understanding that those opinions won’t find their way into my observations. I hope that eventually, after I have earned your trust, you might feel comfortable in sharing some of your experiences with me so that I can better flesh out my ethnography.

If anyone who is part of the Wikipedia subculture wants to contact me, they can do so through this forum and I will be more than happy to incorporate their views as well.

So with that, thank you in advance for letting me tag along with you on what might just turn out to be a ride more wild than Mr. Toad's.

[Lar]

I wanted to take a moment to introduce myself and in an exercise of full disclosure explain my rationale for joining this community. First of all, my name is Julie and I am studying the psychology of subcultures. What does that mean exactly? I study subcultures that exist within imagined communities found on the internet.

(...snip...)

So with that, thank you in advance for letting me tag along with you on what might just turn out to be a ride more wild than Mr. Toad's.

You'll probably want a new thread for your discussions. Good luck with your research.

One question, are you using the term Imagined communities the way the WP article describes the term?

[Jon Awbrey]

I wanted to take a moment to introduce myself and in an exercise of full disclosure explain my rationale for joining this community. First of all, my name is Julie and I am studying the psychology of subcultures. What does that mean exactly? I study subcultures that exist within imagined communities found on the internet.

Welcome, Julie —

I feel obliged to say that your "exercise of full disclosure" falls a bit short of the mark. I am willing, however, to call it a "scratch" and would certainly encourage you to try a truer start off the blocks.

Jon Awbrey

[Julie]

One question, are you using the term Imagined communities the way the WP article describes the term?

Yes and no. The definition from Wikipedia is accurate, but doesn't take into consideration social and cultural changes. Imagined communities is a term used in cultural anthropology to describe any community that isn't based on a physical reference group. Yes, there are opportunities to meet participants in an imagined community, but it isn't a regular thing or the normal way to interact with one another. In terms of Wikipedia, it means that most of the interactions happen without being face to face. This past summer I did some research on encapsulated marginals who are part of the online gaming subculture. All of their social interactions took place within the realms of imagined communities on the internet.

Welcome, Julie —

I feel obliged to say that your "exercise of full disclosure" falls a bit short of the mark. I am willing, however, to call it a "scratch" and would certainly encourage you to try a truer start off the blocks.

Jon Awbrey

I'm confused as to what you are getting at and invite you to actually come out and state what you are accusing me of either in a PM or through these forums.

This post has been edited by Julie:

[thekohser]

I wanted to take a moment to introduce myself and in an exercise of full disclosure explain my rationale for joining this community. First of all, my name is Julie and I am studying the psychology of subcultures. What does that mean exactly? I study subcultures that exist within imagined communities found on the internet.

Welcome, Julie —

I feel obliged to say that your "exercise of full disclosure" falls a bit short of the mark. I am willing, however, to call it a "scratch" and would certainly encourage you to try a truer start off the blocks.

Jon Awbrey

Agree with Jon. "Julie" is Poetlister, until I see or hear otherwise.

Sounds promising, though, once proof of identity that resolves somewhere other than London is established.

[Somey]

That all being said, I am an incredibly opinionated individual and will probably find myself in a situation where I want to post and just might do so with the understanding that those opinions won’t find their way into my observations.

Sounds like you'll fit right in! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

I hope that eventually, after I have earned your trust, you might feel comfortable in sharing some of your experiences with me so that I can better flesh out my ethnography.

Well, there was this time when I was dating this really rich girl, and then one night I mentioned the word "abortion," and next thing ya know, she won't return my phone calls... But I'm guessing that's not the sort of experience you had in mind.

So with that, thank you in advance for letting me tag along with you on what might just turn out to be a ride more wild than Mr. Toad's.

But that isn't really saying much, is it? I mean, if it were wilder than Space Mountain, or maybe the Millenium Force at Cedar Point or the The Steel Dragon at Nagashima Spa Land... that would be something.

Agree with Jon. "Julie" is Poetlister, until I see or hear otherwise.

Well, around here everybody is Poetlister, at least until they pass the "oily finger-pull" initiation test.

Sounds promising, though, once proof of identity that resolves somewhere other than London is established.

Western half of the USA for the first two posts, actually... I hope Julie will forgive me for narrowing things down just slightly, but you can never be too careful with those Londoners!

...The definition from Wikipedia is accurate, but doesn't take into consideration social and cultural changes. Imagined communities is a term used in cultural anthropology to describe any community that isn't based on a physical reference group. Yes, there are opportunities to meet participants in an imagined community, but it isn't a regular thing or the normal way to interact with one another. In terms of Wikipedia, it means that most of the interactions happen without being face to face. This past summer I did some research on encapsulated marginals who are part of the online gaming subculture. All of their social interactions took place within the realms of imagined communities on the internet.

You'll definitely want to start a new thread, then. Most of us actually are interacting with each other face to face, as we'll all being held prisoner in the back room of a bowling alley in Cleveland, OH. Luckily the facility has pretty good wireless internet, and a fully-stocked Coke machine...

I'm confused as to what you are getting at and invite you to actually come out and state what you are accusing me of...

Never mind him. Also, if anyone asks you to "send pics," try to just ignore that too.

[Julie]

Western half of the USA for the first two posts, actually... I hope Julie will forgive me for narrowing things down just slightly, but you can never be too careful with those Londoners!

I actually sent PM's to both posters in which I hope to have clarified things, so you revealing the western US isn't too much info at all.

In a PM with another forum member, I tried to explain exactly what I am hoping to achieve. In cultural anthropology, anthropologists create an ethnography through various ways. Hands down, the most effective way (ok, so I am biased here) is through participant observations. The anthropologist joins a society and eventually becomes enough of a participant that they are no longer observers and their presence no longer changes the behavior. The example I used was Dian Fossey and her gorillas. Not that I am equating myself with Dian Fossey or WR with gorillas, but it's an analogy that is usually effective.

I have to admit that there is a little tiny bit of me that is slightly hurt that what I posted wasn't taken at face value, but then the logical side says, 'if you were in their boat, you'd do the same thing, Jules - suck it up and turn it into opportunity to establish trust.'

I'm still doing a lot of reading here, but once I decide the first topic of my ethnography I'll do as was suggested earlier and start a new thread (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

[GlassBeadGame]

I participated in an academic study of WP editors once. The researcher, a graduate student working on his dissertation, provided his name, the name of his institution (University of Michigan) and the name of his adviser. His project, although a relatively non-intrusive survey was vetted prior to proceeding by a committee concerned with the rights of human subjects. I was provided a written advisement of these facts and my written permission was obtained prior to my participation. I think things like these are what Jon is referring to when he says your full disclosure falls a little short.

[Somey]

I actually sent PM's to both posters in which I hope to have clarified things, so you revealing the western US isn't too much info at all.

I'll still probably be accused of "spying" on you by a certain person over at Encyclopedia Dramatica, but hey, in for a penny, in for a pound... (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)

In cultural anthropology, anthropologists create an ethnography through various ways. Hands down, the most effective way (ok, so I am biased here) is through participant observations. The anthropologist joins a society and eventually becomes enough of a participant that they are no longer observers and their presence no longer changes the behavior.

That's actually something I've been saying for a couple of years now - we've been seeing a lot of data (and related conclusions) about Wikipedia coming from statisticians, and quite a few of them appear to agree with what we've been observing, but IMO the only proper way to study a system like WP is to gather as much anecdotal and experience-derived evidence as possible and try to extrapolate as best you can. Statistics are too malleable in an environment where you never know who anybody is (or how many accounts they're using) or why they do it. Creating proper control groups and base points is next to impossible.

[gomi]

Welcome, Julie. It might do well to remember that you can study the social structures of higher mammals by living among them, but no one has yet proven that Wikipedia editors -- and especially disillusioned ex-Wikipedia editors -- are in fact higher mammals. In any case, good luck.

I participated in an academic study of WP editors once. The researcher ... provided his name, the name of his institution ... and the name of his adviser. ...

Perhaps another way of expressing what GBG is saying is: "Has this been approved by your Human Subjects Committee?" We have a member here who at one time involuntarily enrolled us all in his study of affective communication, to the unhappiness of, I think, all involved.

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

You'll definitely want to start a new thread, then.

I'll say it again, yous admins ought to start a "Newcomers" forums. You need to help exiting newcomers into the post-Wiki experience.

Julie,

strange to blow your own cover with your first post ... do you think that means we won't shoot at you too? Any good anthropologist would come bearing gifts in the first place. I'd say the best thing to do is make a sockpuppet account now, and start editing again as an anonymous.

Basically, the way it works (tm) is to start by criticizing Julie so we will think you are someone else. Then have "Julie" defend herself but be a real twat. We will all take sides with your sockpuppet account, then you have "Julie" leave the project in a hissy fit, so we think it is all over, but you continue to edit on with your sockpuppet account. We will know none the better. Except the admins, who will use it to blackmail you later.

If you are going to play anthropologist, you are going to have to strip off, dress up, paint your face and join in some of the tribal rituals. Puppet wars being one.

So, I'd start by framing the relationship between WR and WP in the mode of ritual warfare. WP, being the far larger and dominant tribe, busy enough with its own internecine warfare. WR, being the more evolved, sagacious and intelligent tribe (ha!), occupying the moral high ground.

Don't worry what your professors think or say, relax, have some fun with it. If you are an undergrad just doing an essay, it really does not matter. If you are over 18 (21 in some states), posting an attractive picture of yourself online WILL help (it does not really matter if it is you or not). This being the Wiki tribe, someone has probably already started to stalk you, and will find out now anyway. It is really only a matter of time ...

Try by starting to edit on some Pee-dia topics relating to Israel-Palestine, Japan-Korea, any obscure East Europe ex-Soviet state ... or removing some of the hard core pornography. I suppose if you really want to do this properly, you ought to move onto the couch of one of the protagonists for a few weeks and observe them in their home environment. Any chance of going undercover as an intern at the Foundation offices like the PETA girls do to animal abusers?

So ... what exactly do you make of the prurient interests of the dominant gorillas in other tribe anyway?

This post has been edited by Cock-up-over-conspiracy:

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

... I forgot the closing </irony> tag.

But you realize that there is a good deal of truth to what I wrote, as per 'the other place'.

[Cedric]

This past summer I did some research on encapsulated marginals who are part of the online gaming subculture. All of their social interactions took place within the realms of imagined communities on the internet.

That experience should serve you well. Wikipedia also has an online gaming subculture.

If you are looking for a primer, I would suggest the WR Blog (link at upper right corner).

[thekohser]

Julie, it would seem that Jon and I have demonstrated the first lesson -- serious people who've had their time massively wasted by pseudonymous frauds are hesitant to welcome the intentions of yet another "first name only" newcomer, until proven to be sincere.

I think we're on the right path now (via e-mail and PM), but your introduction to this Great Ape will have to wait until I'm done with The Animal Kingdom (and several other Disney properties).

Gregory Kohs

[zacherystaylor]

Hi I just joined.

I noticed the bias on Wikipedia a while ago when I moved off of low profile archaeology pages. In most cases I have found it more of an annoyance than a serious problem. One of the claims I have read about was a Lava Lamp which I couldn't care less about and many fringe subjects most of which are bad but even the legitimate mysteries are being censored or misrepresented.

However the thing that made me take Wikipedia censorship and internal bickering serious was the way they handled violence prevention. I saw what they had on the School Shooting page about solutions and it was primarily about gun control. I thought there should be much more about preventing the bullying and child abuse that preceded the problem. This led me to do some work to find sources to back it up. I wound up creating the Preventing School violence page and wound arguing over every little detail.

This led me to think there is a serious problem about a very important subject and I thought wikipedia could do a lot to set a better example for the Mass Media if they got over their internal bickering.

I wound up taking my work off Wikipedia where it would be read by a much smaller audience and I also created a page to help reform Wikipedia since I believe it could be a very important project to provide free education material for the public if it is done right.

For more about this if your interested see the following pages about preventing violence

http://zakherys.tripod.com/nonviolence.htm

and Wikipedia censorship

http://zakherys.tripod.com/wikipedia_censorship.htm

BTW I’m using the same Username and they will figure it out so don’t worry about it.

Good day

[pablo]

Checking in; just here to have a look around this 'moral high ground'

pablo

[Jon Awbrey]

Checking in; just here to have a look around this 'moral high ground'

pablo

You were misinformed.

They tend to grow lower down, and it's the wrong season, anyway.

You might try here and there.

Happy Hunting!

Jon (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/alien.gif)

[Daniel Brandt]

I wanted to take a moment to introduce myself and in an exercise of full disclosure explain my rationale for joining this community. First of all, my name is Julie and I am studying the psychology of subcultures. What does that mean exactly? I study subcultures that exist within imagined communities found on the internet.

Just make sure you're not a spy. If you are, you belong on Wikipedia, not this site.

[Herschelkrustofsky]

Although I think people are going overboard in giving Julie the third degree -- let's not act like Wikipedia, boys and girls, give her a chance to participate before speculating about her intentions -- nonetheless, Daniel makes an interesting point about anthropology. An acquaintance of my studied anthropology at Harvard back in the 60s, and went to Mexico as part of the Harvard Chiapas Project, which pretty much designed and created the Zapatista movement. The British are famous for sending anthropologists/spooks into colonial possessions to profile indigenous populations with an eye to manipulating them, or using anthropologists/spooks to profile and manipulate subcultures within the U.S. (see Gregory Bateson (T-H-L-K-D).)

[Jon Awbrey]

Although I think people are going overboard in giving Julie the third degree — let's not act like Wikipedia, boys and girls, give her a chance to participate before speculating about her intentions — nonetheless, Daniel makes an interesting point about anthropology. An acquaintance of my studied anthropology at Harvard back in the 60s, and went to Mexico as part of the Harvard Chiapas Project, which pretty much designed and created the Zapatista movement. The British are famous for sending anthropologists/spooks into colonial possessions to profile indigenous populations with an eye to manipulating them, or using anthropologists/spooks to profile and manipulate subcultures within the U.S. (see Gregory Bateson (T-H-L-K-D).)

The Wikipedia Review — unlike Wikipedia — is a non-fiction site.

Unlike Wikipedia we don't have to buy the premiss of every storyline.

Sure, we put on the occasional put-on, but all our parodies — unlike Wikipedia — are clearly marked.

"Julie" brought this on by affecting an intention of "full disclosure" — and then tossing out one red herring after another when we asked for the bare minimum that might be expected of that.

If "she" really had a serious academic purpose in the first place, she would recognize a sailed ship by now and go ask for an incomplete — post haste.

But no, she continues to play it out, which proves that the game is all that matters.

And of course there are those of you who will continue to play along — but I'm guessing mostly because the parody has now become well-marked enough to qualify as repertoire for Da Revue.

Jon Awbrey

[Hougoumont]

I've been reading the Review for ages but never bothered to sign up. I singed up because I like to edit on wikipedia, and I just can't stand the power tripping cabal who are wrecking it! On here I find out who is who and whats what. At least here you can get to see who are the real jokers, and yes they do read the Review! The good, the bad and the down right ugly on the hall of fame/infamous http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showforum=57

[Zoloft]

A bit late of me for this thread, but I feel I should mention a few reasons I signed up here.

- deletion of most fair use images on Wikipedia, reducing its utility enormously
- extreme hostility towards new editors
- mawkish, corrupt antics by those in positions of power
- entertainment value of some WR members
- asymptotic curve of WP dissolution, and a need to discuss the aftermath of its deterioration

[Minor4th]

Hello (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

[Moulton]

Hello. Are you a musical chord?

[Minor4th]

Hello. Are you a musical chord?

I am, but there's really no such thing as a minor 4th. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/dry.gif)

This post has been edited by Minor4th:

[Moulton]

A lot of content on WP is like that.

[Lar]

A lot of content on WP is like that.

A lot of your song parodies are like that! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/yak.gif)

[Moulton]

Well, yeah, but they're just silly song parodies. It's not like they're BLPs about real people, with real reputations to be soiled and stigmatized.

This post has been edited by Moulton:

[Jon Awbrey]

Hello (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Bugger Off …

Jon (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

Well, yeah, but they're just silly song parodies.

I am sorry but even I refuse to to parodies of Wings' songs (You'd think that people would have had enough of dirty Wikipedia porn ... But I look around me and I see it isn't so ... Some people wanna fill the world with dirty Wikipedia porn ... And what's wrong with that? I'd like to know, 'cause here I upload again ... I love Wikipedia ...).

So, instead, welcome to The Damned.

Is he really editing the Wikipedia?

I got a feeling inside of me
It's kind of strange like a stormy sea
I don't know why I don't know why
I guess these things have got to be

We gotta editor we hooked him good
Guess we knew that we always would
We all stop to mess him around
We got a brand new editor in town

See them edit edit articles that belong us
We will revert them then we start to fuss
If we can't make them run away
Then we will banned then for another day

We gotta editor we hooked him good
Guess we knew that we always would
We all stop to mess him around
We got a brand new editor in town

You never thought this could happen to you
Why is it so strange even when your edits are true?
You don't deserve to edit our work is great
You'd better leave it'll soon be too late

I got a feeling inside of me
It's kind of strange like a stormy sea
I don't know why we have to edit war
May be cos we still too young to drink and fight in a bar

We gotta editor we hooked him good
Guess we knew that we always would
We all stop to mess him around
We got a brand new editor in town

[ulsterman]

Hello (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Hello. It might be less confusing to call yourself Lower 4th. (For American's, that's 8th grade.)

[Moulton]

Minor4th, I see you are working on the Law Project on Wikipedia.

I would appreciate your comment on this.

[Minor4th]

Hello (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Hello. It might be less confusing to call yourself Lower 4th. (For American's, that's 8th grade.)

Are you confused?

Minor4th, I see you are working on the Law Project on Wikipedia.

I would appreciate your comment on this.

I will take a look and let you know what I think.


Why is it combining my two posts into one?

This post has been edited by Minor4th:

[ulsterman]

Are you confused?

Not me, but then I'm a genius, and modest with it. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

Why is it combining my two posts into one?

it does that if you post twice to the same thread within a few minutes. It's a feature, not a bug.

[CharlotteWebb]

Hello. It might be less confusing to call yourself Lower 4th. (For American's, that's 8th grade.)

Are you confused?

If only you knew.

[Minor4th]

Hello. It might be less confusing to call yourself Lower 4th. (For American's, that's 8th grade.)

Are you confused?

If only you knew.

Do tell.

[EricBarbour]

Hello. It might be less confusing to call yourself Lower 4th. (For American's, that's 8th grade.)

Are you confused?

If only you knew.

Do tell.

I'll drop a hint. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

[Minor4th]

I don't really know where to post this -- I am still getting familiar with the navigation here.

Has anyone posted anything here about the correspondence between the FBI and WMF over the use of the FBI seal on Wiki?

[GlassBeadGame]

I don't really know where to post this -- I am still getting familiar with the navigation here.

Has anyone posted anything here about the correspondence between the FBI and WMF over the use of the FBI seal on Wiki?

Long thread here.