Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

_ General Discussion _ How do you deal with a cabal?

Posted by: TheKartingWikipedian

Yes, good old British and Irish disputes again evilgrin.gif

So how do you do it on Wikipedia? There's a hard nut of Irish Nationalist editors who stick through thick and thin (mainly thick) to support the twisted POVs of each other. There is no similar cabal of Irish unionist editors to combat the buggers. This is because all editors eligible for that mould work in a most gentlemanly fashion and wouldn't sink so low as to tag team edit. In the list we have, in no particular order (and the list is not exhaustive),

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

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

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Domer48

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Murry1975

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rannph%C3%A1irt%C3%AD_anaithnid

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

Then of course we've got part time admin and general all round scumbag http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cailil

These gits back each other up to the hilt. How many of them are the same person? Lurking somewhere in there is probably that arch serial sockfucker http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Wikip%C3%A9ire

So how to deal with them. Maybe a unionist sock farm is the only way. Thoughts please.

Posted by: Emperor

Wasn't Ireland starting to finally honor their WWII vets who fought for the Allies? I think I read some story about that a few months back.

Until they get that stuff in order, yeah whatever I'll support the British side.

Posted by: TheKartingWikipedian

Turns out the biased Cailil is dealing with the problem. In a classic case of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cailil&diff=prev&oldid=494709674 laugh.gif he's banned one of the tossers from British Isles stuff, namely Bjmullan. In his haste he's also banned a gallant unionist editor, van speijk. Still, halfway right is not bad I suppose.

Posted by: EricBarbour

Let's see you write up a timeline of the British Isles/Irish editwarring, TKW. Go ahead. It's a LOT more difficult than it appears.

Posted by: TheKartingWikipedian

An interesting development on the British Isles front here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Politics_in_the_British_Isles#Politics_in_the_British_Isles

Here we have the closing admin deciding that despite the inconclusiveness of the debate, that the aforementioned article should be deleted. But then, the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Moreschi does think that the term British Isles is, quote "rather loaded". So I suppose he would want it deleted, wouldn't he?

It's this sort of stuff that really makes you puke, and realise that Wikipedia is governed by complete arse'oles (or assholes if you prefer).

Posted by: ComeGetMe

And Highkings Topic Ban is being reviewed and its likely he'll be back to his old tricks again. TKW, time to get some of those sockies dusted off. I assume VanS was one of yours so that was a setback.

Posted by: Fusion

QUOTE(TheKartingWikipedian @ Tue 29th May 2012, 4:55pm) *

An interesting development on the British Isles front here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Politics_in_the_British_Isles#Politics_in_the_British_Isles

Here we have the closing admin deciding that despite the inconclusiveness of the debate, that the aforementioned article should be deleted. But then, the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Moreschi does think that the term British Isles is, quote "rather loaded". So I suppose he would want it deleted, wouldn't he?

It's this sort of stuff that really makes you puke, and realise that Wikipedia is governed by complete arse'oles (or assholes if you prefer).

Certainly I realise that "Politics of the British Isles" is a meaningless article title and I wonder at the motives of its originator. We all know that the British Isles includes two separate countries plus various semi-independent bits under British protection. And of course there are some devolved bits where the politics may much differ from the national one. You might as well have "Politics of Central Asia" covering several bits of the ex USSR.

Posted by: TheKartingWikipedian

QUOTE(ComeGetMe @ Fri 1st June 2012, 3:57pm) *

And Highkings Topic Ban is being reviewed and its likely he'll be back to his old tricks again. TKW, time to get some of those sockies dusted off. I assume VanS was one of yours so that was a setback.

My policy is never to confirm or deny the existence or otherwise of a sock. However, VanSpeijk is a bit of a loss. He was doing some good work and has now been silenced. But, so has Mullan, so maybe his job was done anyway - but wait - arch BI deletor is back, as you said he would be, un-topic-banned and immediately he's away with it. nope.gif

Haven't you got to laugh at that clown Cailil and his ramblings. This git has set himself up as the Wikipedia judge , jury and executioner in this matter. How the community has let him get away with it is pretty disgusting, but that's Wikipedia for you.

Ho hum! back to the struggle. One bollock brain (bjm, not vs) is silenced as another one is let loose again. Onward into battle !!! rolleyes.gif