Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Heat

About a year ago, Jayjg lost all of the "Allegations of [name of country here]-ian Apartheid" articles which he and his meatpuppets had carefully built in a desperate attempt to make "Israeli apartheid" seem to be a run of the mill allegation.

Now, it's down to the ridiculous "Allegations of apartheid" article which Jayjg created years ago and then redirected only to recreate it in an attempt to make a WP:POINT about "Allegations of Israeli apartheid".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Allegations_of_apartheid_%28fifth_nomination%29

Posted by: that one guy

you build a pov article, expect it to be either A. torn apart till it's npov, or B. deleted.

Posted by: Viridae

Any reason this is in the tar pit?

Posted by: guy

It seems to have been created there. Moving to the Jayjg forum.

Posted by: Heat

Jayjg's problem is he thinks he's being clever when he's actually his own worst enemy. He really, really wants to delete that Israeli apartheid article so what does he do? He creates an obstacle to it being deleted. How could anyone logically argue for deleting Israeli apartheid when an inferior "Allegations of apartheid" article exists? You can't argue in favor of keeping an article dubious allegations of apartheid while at the same time arguing that a better sourced article on Israeli apartheid should be deleted. He's put himself and his meatpuppets in a Catch-22 situation and his arrogance and pride stops him from breaking out of it. It truly is magnificent to watch. Most people would realize that deleting "Allegations of apartheid" is the necessary first step to take if you want to delete Israeli apartheid but not Jay and because his meatpuppets unthinkingly follow his lead on these things he's guaranteed the undeletable status of the Israeli apartheid article.

Posted by: One

No, I don't think that's what he's doing.

I think you have it right in your first post. Having decisively lost the deletion battle (and I think that the number of inclusionists+Palestinian sympathizers are great enough to throw any AfD--there are enough sources for nonpartisan inclusionists to keep), he decided to make allegations of apartheid look routine. Basically, he wanted a taxobox in the Israel article that said "allegations of apartheid series" and listed two dozen other countries.

If you can't delete an unfriendly article, you can at least make the accusations therein look absurdly frivolous (along with "allegations of Belgian apartheid" and whatever else).

Posted by: Heat

Indeed. And Jay's trying very hard to cover that up in an edit war with CJCurrie on the AFD itself!

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Allegations_of_apartheid_%28fifth_nomination%29&action=history

Posted by: Heat

Now liefern's gotten in on the act http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArticles_for_deletion%2FAllegations_of_apartheid_%28fifth_nomination%29&diff=224815816&oldid=224814678

I thought editing someone else's comments was a big no-no. How do Jay and his meatpuppets get away with it?

Posted by: Saltimbanco

They're Jay and his meatpuppets! Duh!

Posted by: Heat

Sorry, I forget about the "Jayjg exemption" rule.

It's been brought up on ANI http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#AfD_participant_redacting_statement_by_nominator

Posted by: Cobalt

Y'know, if I didn't have better things to do, I'd make an account, find all of these discussions, and where personal attacks appear, just remind everyone to "WP:AGF" and be "WP:CIVIL" and just see how much time elapses until I'm blocked.

Posted by: LaraLove

... or promoted to admin. It could go either way for this is As the Wiki-globe Turns.

Posted by: Cobalt

Ha! I'd be the worst admin. I'd just stop, at that point. Or maybe that'd make me one of the better ones.

Never gonna happen though.

Posted by: guy

Really?

Posted by: LaraLove

I agree with guy. I don't think you've thought that through. You would have to put a lot of effort into being the worst admin. Srsly.

Posted by: Cobalt

By worst, I meant "put no effort into it." Not "worst" like what we document here.

Posted by: Heat

Ha! Kendrick7 and Jayjg meatpuppet 6SJ7 are now edit-warring over the title
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allegations_of_apartheid&action=history

Posted by: Proabivouac

One of the great ironies here is that, back in 2006, Maisonsurlagamme created several articles of more or less the same nature, Global Apartheid, Gender Apartheid, Sexual Apartheid, etc., in order to justify the existence of an Apartheid (disambiguation) page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Apartheid_(disambiguation)&diff=56056192&oldid=56055835
The point was so that anyone who searched for "Apartheid," instead of going to the article about the actual historical Apartheid, arrived on this page with Israel directly beneath South Africa.

You can also see this Maison sock, User:Sonofzion, creating an article "Apartheid" to accomplish the same purpose, to make it seem like "Apartheid" is some general phenomenon of which South Africa and Israel provide examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Apartheid&diff=60233306&oldid=60233061

Posted by: Rootology

Aren't these supposed to be under probation?

Posted by: Milton Roe

Jay and the Meatpuppets I thought were a little-known 50's Do-Wop group. Or they might be from the 60's. I'm trying to think of a hit....

This Wiki Cat
Jay J G and the Meatboys (Apologies to Gary Lewis and the Playboys)

Who wants to tryyyyy….. to RfD this thiiiing,
Still mentions Palastinians now, and I don’t like that sceeene.

This Wiki Cat doesn’t work for me anymore,
And this Wiki Cat doesn’t mean what it meant before,
So if you’ve got … apartheid guys …. in screws,
Oppressors can’t be Jews!

This POV is genuine, like truth should be…eee
And if your view is precious like… my view sure is for me…eee,

Then this Wiki Cat must mean Southern Africa
And this Wiki Cat has to mean Nelson Mandela
And we can’t run… comparisons… like water
Especially from Jimmy Carter…

Posted by: Heat

I'm confused. If you look at the left hand side of the page you're linking to it shows Jayjg saying "no, this is what was agreed. If you want to move the Apartheid outside South Africa article, then get some agreement".

Look at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allegations_of_apartheid&diff=next&oldid=55678416 which is dated 5 June 2006, 18 days BEFORE your link above. Isn't that they same article you claimed Sonofzion created?

I don't know Proab - I think you're looking at this through idelogical blinkers and failing to see Jayjg's gaming of the situation for political purposes.

Where you are right is that Jayjg is now defending spurious articles on "apartheid" - the exact opposite position he had in 2006 and did exactly what he claimed Homey was doing by helping create a string of dubious "Allegations of apartheid" articles. By doing so he's painted him and his meatpuppets into a corner since there's absoutely no way "Israeli apartheid" can be deleted as long as another "apartheid" article that has less justication continues to exist. Jay's hubris has gotten in the way and he's led his meatpuppets into a blind alley.

It does appear that Jayjg is now doing Homey's work for him.

Posted by: Heat

And it's been deleted! Watch for a major shitfit from Jayjg and his puppets!

Posted by: Saltimbanco

Shall we start the "Sarcasticidealist Deathwatch" thread now, or wait to see what initial responses are?

Posted by: sarcasticidealist

I'd be surprised if I took substantial flack about this. I attached a "closing" tag to it without knowing how I was going to close it, and spent an hour reading it and related materials. When all was said and done, I found the case for deletion compelling. My limited interactions with Jayjg have been friendly, and I don't perceive my closure as some kind of blow against a cabal, real or imagined. I'd be surprised if anybody perceived them otherwise, but I may be overestimating my reputation on Wikipedia.