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

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Help

This forum is for discussing specific Wikipedia editors, editing patterns, and general efforts by those editors to influence or direct content in ways that might not be in keeping with Wikipedia policy. Please source your claims and provide links where appropriate. For a glossary of terms frequently used when discussing Wikipedia and related projects, please refer to Wikipedia:Glossary.

10 Pages V « < 4 5 6 7 8 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Hell Freezes Over, SlimVirgin joins the Wikipedia Review
everyking
post Thu 18th December 2008, 6:53pm
Post #101


Postmaster
*******

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



QUOTE(EuroSceptic @ Thu 18th December 2008, 5:36pm) *

All I see in Hell is someone who was in power and lost it and now is upset.


Without presuming to know how greatly SV's recent mistreatment has influenced her views, do you think a person's criticisms are invalidated if they were partially spurred by some personal mistreatment? If that's the case, the whole forum must look rather silly to you. Most of us, myself included, would probably not be here if we hadn't felt that we were mistreated at some point.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Moulton
post Thu 18th December 2008, 7:19pm
Post #102


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

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

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 18th December 2008, 12:19pm) *
QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 18th December 2008, 7:38am) *
Notice his threatening remark on Wikiversity to Dan Tobias, too:

QUOTE(Jackboot Jimbo to Dan Tobias)
Dtobias, I am happy to remove you from the project as well if necessary.

Yes, I don't think the way Jimbo treated me (in an offhand, drive-by way) was fair or reasonable... but, unlike you, I didn't devote all my efforts in multiple sites over an extended period to attacking and denouncing Jimbo and the entire site in retaliation, until multiple people of multiple political persuasions were all so pissed at me that there was no major resistance to banning me just about everywhere. Instead, I made a few calm remarks to the effect that I disagreed with the fairness of the comment, then moved on to other things, resulting in a current state of affairs where I'm not blocked or banned from any project.

Are you saying Jimbo acted on the basis of the quantity of my remarks rather than the character of my criticisms? Does that explain why, when he was asked to explain his reasons, he failed to offer a shred of evidence to defend his thuggish actions?

QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 18th December 2008, 12:19pm) *
I'm fully capable of obsessive-compulsive behavior, and edged in that direction for a while when I was in the thick of the BADSITES wars (in the process pissing various people off, some of whom were even at least partly on my side politically), but in a calmer mode I know that acting this way is not a productive way of accomplishing rational change.

I don't believe rational change is in the cards, Dan.

I believe dramatic change is in the future, for the simple reason that Oblivious Personality Disorder is not resolved by rational or measured change.

It's like waking up from a coma.

The process of waking up is a sudden change of state, like turning on a light.

I frankly don't expect the light ever to turn on for Jimbo or his closest sycophants — Cary Bass, Paul Mitchell, Tracy Walker, Mike Umbricht, etc. But perhaps a few young people who are on the razor's edge between Jimbo's Jackboot Culture and the more enlightened 21st Century alternative will scootch the other way.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Anonymous editor
post Thu 18th December 2008, 8:39pm
Post #103


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 666
Joined: Mon 4th Aug 2008, 6:21pm
Member No.: 7,398



What is the significance of 1 January 1988 and why enter any date at all?

This post has been edited by Anonymous editor: Thu 18th December 2008, 8:40pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
gomi
post Thu 18th December 2008, 8:42pm
Post #104


Member
********

Group: Members
Posts: 3,022
Joined: Fri 17th Nov 2006, 6:38pm
Member No.: 565



QUOTE(everyking @ Thu 18th December 2008, 10:53am) *
QUOTE(EuroSceptic @ Thu 18th December 2008, 5:36pm) *
All I see in Hell is someone who was in power and lost it and now is upset.


Without presuming to know how greatly SV's recent mistreatment has influenced her views, do you think a person's criticisms are invalidated if they were partially spurred by some personal mistreatment? If that's the case, the whole forum must look rather silly to you. Most of us, myself included, would probably not be here if we hadn't felt that we were mistreated at some point

I think that is very well put, Everyking. Almost all of us, including most of the leading lights among our present and past members, have run into some kind of trouble on Wikipedia. Some ended up banned, some not. Some ran into various problems, but are still in positions of power, and some were knocked down a peg. Some left willingly, and others were booted.

Clearly, a never-ending stream of self-absorbed kvetching quickly becomes tiring for all concerned. Those who are most incisive here -- and I believe most listened-to -- are those for whom their fall from grace or push out the exit of Wikipedia became a moment of clarity, and who then can draw larger, more universal conclusions about the nature of the Wikipedia community than those that come only from their own experience.

One can only hope that SlimVirgin has had that moment of clarity. As with others, it will take some time to expiate her sins of power-abuse, but it is entirely possible that she can and will do so. As with (e.g.) Lar, she need not chuck it all over the hedge, either -- one can disagree and be reasonable about it. But if she is only here to kibbitz and defend the old order (i.e. the one with her in it), then it will quickly become tiresome.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EuroSceptic
post Thu 18th December 2008, 9:32pm
Post #105


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon 7th Aug 2006, 2:50pm
From: Europe
Member No.: 322



QUOTE(everyking @ Thu 18th December 2008, 7:53pm) *

QUOTE(EuroSceptic @ Thu 18th December 2008, 5:36pm) *

All I see in Hell is someone who was in power and lost it and now is upset.


Without presuming to know how greatly SV's recent mistreatment has influenced her views, do you think a person's criticisms are invalidated if they were partially spurred by some personal mistreatment? If that's the case, the whole forum must look rather silly to you. Most of us, myself included, would probably not be here if we hadn't felt that we were mistreated at some point.

No, she can have very valid reasons to complain, but that she has endured now that what she has done to many, does not make what she has done to many go away.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kato
post Thu 18th December 2008, 9:48pm
Post #106


dhd
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined: Fri 29th Dec 2006, 8:39pm
Member No.: 767



Can we extract these "OMG it's Slim" posts from the posts discussing Jimbo and the Arbcom? I nearly missed the latter as a result.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
tarantino
post Thu 18th December 2008, 10:15pm
Post #107


the Dude abides
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,440
Joined: Mon 30th Jul 2007, 11:41pm
Member No.: 2,143



QUOTE(Alex @ Thu 18th December 2008, 4:33pm) *

QUOTE(tarantino @ Thu 18th December 2008, 5:02am) *

Jimbo's not even a custodian on enwikiversity, Where's the log that shows he temporarily assumed that power? It's neither on enwikiversity or meta. Is the Founder bit omnipotent across all projects now?


He's a steward. Stewards have admin rights on all wikis.



Ahh, I see what happened now. Prior to May 2008 it was necessary for stewards to add themselves to various user groups on various wikis to perform some of their functions. Since then they made themselves global sysops (like the WMF staff are) and also have the ability to modify their own global rights on a whim by changing group permissions of Special:GlobalUsers/steward. That sounds like a good idea.

There's a summary of permissions that global users have here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Comets...al_group_rights
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cla68
post Fri 19th December 2008, 12:51am
Post #108


Postmaster
*******

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

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Kato @ Wed 17th December 2008, 4:12pm) *

QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Wed 17th December 2008, 3:58pm) *

In the Wikipedia of two years ago, editors were blocked by their ideological opponents, by means of elaborate subterfuge. Now they get blocked in fits of pique. Perhaps this is progress.

2005-2007 was the time of The Great Expansion at Wikipedia. When the world and his wife arrived to take control of topics. It was an era akin to an online World War Two. With accompanying Wiki-atrocities committed by many parties.

Now, with all those old warriors exhausted, dispersed, and in some cases exiled, Wikipedia has stagnated, but matured somewhat. Things that went on in 2005 would be unthinkable now. But what it needs now is a Wiki-Marshall Plan to shift the place towards a responsible, productive environment. And to set an example to the rest of the internet that the kind of haphazard, free-for-all, defamation and drama machine is no longer acceptable.


Well said. Also, earlier in this thread Somey said that the intention of power-grabbers in Wikipedia is to protect their edits. I think he's exactly right. It's all about controlling content. One of the main ways that this is done is by cabalism, such as by using email lists to ask people to help you revert other editors (remember Jayjg's famous email missent to the Wikien list) so that you won't violate the 3rr policy.

And, as Somey points out, we should focus on the big picture of this issue. How can Wikipedia keep people from controlling content? What kind of governance process would work? As said before, apart from why ArbCom exists, whether it's simply to facilitate Jimbo's detached managerial control of the project or not, one of the reasons ArbCom gets so much attention is because they have the power, supposedly, to control content by formally banning editors, indirectly change policy, and/or add other restrictions to editors that ultimately may affect content. It's all about the content.

This post has been edited by Cla68: Fri 19th December 2008, 1:20am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Lar
post Fri 19th December 2008, 1:20am
Post #109


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

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



For the record I am here not because I myself feel I have been mistreated, but rather because I wish to learn from others here (including those who feel they have been mistreated, as well as others who merely offer criticism or information). So haranguing others is not of much interest to me, which is why I've not said much.

QUOTE(EuroSceptic @ Thu 18th December 2008, 4:32pm) *

QUOTE(everyking @ Thu 18th December 2008, 7:53pm) *

QUOTE(EuroSceptic @ Thu 18th December 2008, 5:36pm) *

All I see in Hell is someone who was in power and lost it and now is upset.


Without presuming to know how greatly SV's recent mistreatment has influenced her views, do you think a person's criticisms are invalidated if they were partially spurred by some personal mistreatment? If that's the case, the whole forum must look rather silly to you. Most of us, myself included, would probably not be here if we hadn't felt that we were mistreated at some point.

No, she can have very valid reasons to complain, but that she has endured now that what she has done to many, does not make what she has done to many go away.

The way to atone for past wrongs is to admit them and to work to rectify the consequences. Not merely to turn up and say "new wrongs are being committed" without any acknowledgment of one's own involvement. Especially when the wrongs differ not in kind but only in circumstance.

But this assumes the premise that there actually has been mistreatment. I'm not clear that is the case. The proximate event for SlimVirgin temporarily (not permanently) being desysopped may have been insufficient if it was the first incident, but it was a culmination, not an isolated event.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Proabivouac
post Fri 19th December 2008, 1:36am
Post #110


Bane of all wikiland
*******

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,246
Joined: Thu 23rd Aug 2007, 8:25am
Member No.: 2,647

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Cla68 @ Fri 19th December 2008, 12:51am) *

How can Wikipedia keep people from controlling content?

It shouldn't. Instead, it should make such control overt, so that rational decisions can be made about who is ultimately responsible for what.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cock-up-over-conspiracy
post Fri 19th December 2008, 4:26am
Post #111


Now censored by flckr.com and who else ... ???
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,693
Joined: Sat 6th Dec 2008, 6:08am
Member No.: 9,267



QUOTE(Cla68 @ Fri 19th December 2008, 12:51am) *
How can Wikipedia keep people from controlling content?

It has a responsibility to do so ... but it has no will to do so because it all adds to the addictive quality of 'the game'. As someone wrote of me failing to understand it was not an environment in which one can "win". it is however all about gaining ground and holding it all all insane human cost. To stop one's involvement in the project to to likely "give away" that ground to someone else (hence it appeals to such base instincts such as ego and greed).

More to the point though, how should Wikipedia control its public content?

All topics "in beta" kept hidden from search engines in a members only zone. Only finished quality, peer reviewed topics published in public domain. Qualified editors with areas of responsibility require to make changes or additions to any new information or corrections.

SV ... I saw her at work and at times it was unnecessary painful towards others. I look forward to the penitent confession on the way back from the Wikipedia's Damascus fueled by lots of salacious gossip about behind the scene action before commenting.

Strip it bare, sweetheart ...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
CharlotteWebb
post Fri 19th December 2008, 7:13pm
Post #112


Postmaster General
********

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

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Anonymous editor @ Thu 18th December 2008, 8:39pm) *

What is the significance of 1 January 1988 and why enter any date at all?

Probably chosen at random; speculation is a mortal game.

QUOTE(Cock-up-over-conspiracy @ Fri 19th December 2008, 4:26am) *

All topics "in beta" kept hidden from search engines in a members only zone. Only finished quality, peer reviewed topics published in public domain. Qualified editors with areas of responsibility require to make changes or additions to any new information or corrections.

Err... "public domain" has a completely different meaning, just so you know.

No article is ever considered "finished". Even "featured" articles undergo continuous improvement. Even when it has its day on the main page, a casual contributor may see it and add a few new sentences or a paragraph or fix an error that went completely unnoticed in the rigorous FAC screening process (nevermind the 99-odd vandalisms and reverts leading up to this).

If we ever convince the server people to enable a "stable versions" system (you can see how it works on deutschwiki and a few others), we should then ask Google to only index revisions confirmed to be free of vandalism.

That way we at least won't have gems like "OMG Josh is gay" cached in the google search page for a person whose name isn't even Josh.

I'm not sure what you mean by "qualified editors". Often one has a bigger axe to grind the longer they've been studying something (and the greater their personal sense of qualification).

It takes a village at least. Even experts need a sanity check, and usually some help understanding that "please cite a source other than yourself" isn't meant as a personal attack.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Selina
post Fri 19th December 2008, 8:23pm
Post #113


Cat herder
******

Group: Staffy
Posts: 1,513
Joined: Sun 19th Feb 2006, 10:28pm
Member No.: 1

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(sarcasticidealist @ Thu 18th December 2008, 3:17am) *

QUOTE(Heat @ Wed 17th December 2008, 7:40pm) *
That aside, I hope we'll see an end to the conspiracy theories that the more obsessive of wikipedia's critics have generated in regards to SV.
Are you kidding? Her appearance here only confirms that WR was part of the conspiracy all along.

I hope for your sake that's sarcasm and you don't actually believe that o_O Hard to tell (as I have no idea of your politics though I've seen your name a few times can't remember where)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
One
post Fri 19th December 2008, 8:26pm
Post #114


Postmaster General
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,553
Joined: Tue 25th Dec 2007, 10:49am
Member No.: 4,284

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Selina @ Fri 19th December 2008, 8:23pm) *

QUOTE(sarcasticidealist @ Thu 18th December 2008, 3:17am) *

QUOTE(Heat @ Wed 17th December 2008, 7:40pm) *
That aside, I hope we'll see an end to the conspiracy theories that the more obsessive of wikipedia's critics have generated in regards to SV.
Are you kidding? Her appearance here only confirms that WR was part of the conspiracy all along.

I hope for your sake that's sarcasm and you don't actually believe that o_O Hard to tell

I hope for your sake that's sarcasm, but I don't think that it is. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/sick.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Selina
post Fri 19th December 2008, 8:35pm
Post #115


Cat herder
******

Group: Staffy
Posts: 1,513
Joined: Sun 19th Feb 2006, 10:28pm
Member No.: 1

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif) I actually thought about deleting it after, but well ... there's been more weird accusations here

nevermind then! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
One
post Fri 19th December 2008, 8:39pm
Post #116


Postmaster General
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,553
Joined: Tue 25th Dec 2007, 10:49am
Member No.: 4,284

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



sarcasticidealist is no SlimConspiracy theorist.

Perhaps we should pass a rule that all sarcasm requires emoticons. Been a lot of failures to communicate recently.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Viridae
post Fri 19th December 2008, 9:25pm
Post #117


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,319
Joined: Sat 19th May 2007, 4:16am
Member No.: 1,498

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(One @ Sat 20th December 2008, 7:39am) *

sarcasticidealist is no SlimConspiracy theorist.

Perhaps we should pass a rule that all sarcasm requires emoticons. Been a lot of failures to communicate recently.


"...Some men you just can't reach. So you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it... well, he gets it. I don't like it any more than you men."
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
One
post Fri 19th December 2008, 9:35pm
Post #118


Postmaster General
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,553
Joined: Tue 25th Dec 2007, 10:49am
Member No.: 4,284

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Viridae @ Fri 19th December 2008, 9:25pm) *

QUOTE(One @ Sat 20th December 2008, 7:39am) *

sarcasticidealist is no SlimConspiracy theorist.

Perhaps we should pass a rule that all sarcasm requires emoticons. Been a lot of failures to communicate recently.


"...Some men you just can't reach. So you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it... well, he gets it. I don't like it any more than you men."

Your vote was the most amusing one on my ArbCom campaign. Sadly, it also preempted my intention to say "what we've got here is a failure to arbitrate." I'll have to wait months to use that line now.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Fri 19th December 2008, 10:04pm
Post #119


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Kato @ Thu 18th December 2008, 1:48pm) *

Can we extract these "OMG it's Slim" posts from the posts discussing Jimbo and the Arbcom? I nearly missed the latter as a result.

Hear hear.

I have an idea. Let's call her "Hell Girl".
It's a reference to a good anime series. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
LessHorrid vanU
post Fri 19th December 2008, 10:05pm
Post #120


Devils Advocaat
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 836
Joined: Thu 11th Oct 2007, 9:56pm
Member No.: 3,466

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Anonymous editor @ Thu 18th December 2008, 8:39pm) *

What is the significance of 1 January 1988 and why enter any date at all?


I wondered that as well... It makes 1 January 2009 a milestone birthday, though.

nb. BritEng variant for date (if it still matters).
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

10 Pages V « < 4 5 6 7 8 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 8th 12 14, 6:43am