Dr. Blofeld and cookie-cutter article production Options

[everyking]

Recently I noticed that User:Dr. Blofeld had created a large number of articles on members of the Gabonese National Assembly. These articles were created without any individual research; Dr. Blofield simply went down a list of names, creating a substub for each name on the list. I work on that subject area and was annoyed at the extra work I needed to do to clean up these articles. I was annoyed to see that in some cases the gender of the individuals was given wrongly, that the wording was confusing, and that the formatting was bad, but mainly I was annoyed that these articles were created in complete ignorance of their subjects--some of these people are quite notable politicians, but the most important aspects of their careers received no mention in Blofeld's substubs. Since he has created more than 10,000 articles in total, I can only assume that he does this kind of thing all the time.

So I went to complain, noting my appreciation of the effort but urging him to "try to put some individual thought into the articles you create". Blofeld reverted my message. Later I complained again, and this time he called me a "dumb smuck" and acted as though my well-intentioned complaint was deeply insulting. Personally, I think if you create error-ridden, cookie-cutter substubs you should be prepared to accept a little criticism and cooperate with people who are trying to improve what you created. Ultimately I responded to him on my talk page since he deleted everything I wrote on his talk page.

Is this kind of cookie-cutter article production acceptable, even if the articles contain various minor problems? I think editors should engage in a modicum of actual research before adding an article to the mainspace. I think that's part of the responsibility that goes along with being an editor.

This post has been edited by everyking: Wed 4th February 2009, 6:56am

[Somey]

Since he has created more than 10,000 articles in total, I can only assume that he does this kind of thing all the time.

Indeed - a cursory look at the contribs of this Dr. Blofeld (T-C-L-K-R-D) suggests this person is perhaps dangerously obsessed with creating worthless 1-2 sentence stubs on just about every minor third-world political representative and voting district in existence.

Is this kind of cookie-cutter article production acceptable, even if the articles contain various minor problems?

Whether or not it's "acceptable" isn't really the issue, is it? The problem is that some people seem hell-bent on maintaining the illusion that Wikipedia is still growing and that they haven't entered a maintenance phase at all. It looks suspiciously like a steadfast refusal to accept reality and deal with the site's actual problems, instead insisting on "keepin' the train a-rollin'!"

Meanwhile, most of the Gabonese (and other countries') politicians being "stubbed" in this manner will only serve one short term and then disappear into obscurity, but the stubs this "Blofeld" character and his ilk have created will live on for years, maybe decades, in some form or other, and probably will never be updated. A few of them will become BLP nightmares too, of course.

Maybe there's some sort of "meta-project" going on to create categories of "{country name} politician stubs" for every country in the world? Highly bogus at best, though I suppose if you're going to do it for one of them...

I think editors should engage in a modicum of actual research before adding an article to the mainspace. I think that's part of the responsibility that goes along with being an editor.

Um, just what wiki site did you say you were referring to, again?

[Cla68]

Recently I noticed that User:Dr. Blofeld had created a large number of articles on members of the Gabonese National Assembly. These articles were created without any individual research; Dr. Blofield simply went down a list of names, creating a substub for each name on the list. I work on that subject area and was annoyed at the extra work I needed to do to clean up these articles. I was annoyed to see that in some cases the gender of the individuals was given wrongly, that the wording was confusing, and that the formatting was bad, but mainly I was annoyed that these articles were created in complete ignorance of their subjects--some of these people are quite notable politicians, but the most important aspects of their careers received no mention in Blofeld's substubs. Since he has created more than 10,000 articles in total, I can only assume that he does this kind of thing all the time.

So I went to complain, noting my appreciation of the effort but urging him to "try to put some individual thought into the articles you create". Blofeld reverted my message. Later I complained again, and this time he called me a "dumb smuck" and acted as though my well-intentioned complaint was deeply insulting. Personally, I think if you create error-ridden, cookie-cutter substubs you should be prepared to accept a little criticism and cooperate with people who are trying to improve what you created. Ultimately I responded to him on my talk page since he deleted everything I wrote on his talk page.

Is this kind of cookie-cutter article production acceptable, even if the articles contain various minor problems? I think editors should engage in a modicum of actual research before adding an article to the mainspace. I think that's part of the responsibility that goes along with being an editor.

I think I saw somewhere that Dr. Blofeld has started more articles than anyone else in en.Wikipedia. He seems to be on a mission.

[EricBarbour]

Indeed - a cursory look at the contribs of this Dr. Blofeld (T-C-L-K-R-D) suggests this person is perhaps dangerously obsessed with creating worthless 1-2 sentence stubs on just about every minor third-world political representative and voting district in existence.

Just what a bastard would need to do to build up
Magical Wiki-Dust, so he can run for ArbCom eventually.
Isn't it?

[Bottled_Spider]

I think I saw somewhere that Dr. Blofeld has started more articles than anyone else in en.Wikipedia. He seems to be on a mission.

Several missions, by the look of things. Apparently, he's written 1/65th of wikipedia which, if you think about it, is damned awesome. And let's not forget that he's Wikipedia's most productive editor overall and I don't just been creating articles. He's a real man too, as he likes "Beautiful women" and Fender guitars (and has an IQ of 149!!!). Finally, he appears to have achieved the distinction of possessing the most Myspace-like userpage on Wikipedia. Truly a prince among men.

[cyofee]

Less is more, indeed.

[Sarcasticidealist]

Just what a bastard would need to do to build up
Magical Wiki-Dust, so he can run for ArbCom eventually.
Isn't it?

Say what you will about Blofield; power hunger is not among his traits. He's never even applied for adminship, I don't believe (and if he has, it was a long time ago, and he's since renounced any interest).

[LaraLove]

Several missions, by the look of things. Apparently, he's written 1/65th of wikipedia which, if you think about it, is damned awesome. And let's not forget that he's Wikipedia's most productive editor overall and I don't just been creating articles. He's a real man too, as he likes "Beautiful women" and Fender guitars (and has an IQ of 149!!!). Finally, he appears to have achieved the distinction of possessing the most Myspace-like userpage on Wikipedia. Truly a prince among men.

1/65th of Wikipedia's articles, perhaps. But how many of his 10k+ articles aren't stubs? How many of them are BLPs? And, of those, how many is he keeping his eye on? If one chooses to write nothing but stubs, there shouldn't be a lot of credit given for expanding Wikipedia. Doing a search and finding a stub is a waste of reader's time because the other links in the search will surely yield greater information. Refusal to communicate with others in good faith is never good. And such a user really shouldn't have a userbox on their god-awful looking user page that reads:

Blofeld the Bald thinks of Wikipedia as a Global Empire in which the greater the number and detail of articles and sources brings us closer to World Domination. This organization does not tolerate failure

1. I suppose he feels like it's only his responsibility to work on "the greater the number" and leave the "detail" to others.
2. The organization most certainly does tolerate failure. See Jimbo Wales, David Gerard, et al.

[carbuncle]

Finally, he appears to have achieved the distinction of possessing the most Myspace-like userpage on Wikipedia. Truly a prince among men.

I especially enjoyed the userbox that says "BJ - This user is living on a prayer". Apparently he's a Bon Jovi fan, but that wasn't my first interpretation.

[Friday]

I talked to him about the same exact thing (with a different set of articles) and his response was the same- rude and dismissive. Since what he's doing is (arguably) not very harmful, I figured it wasn't worth spending much effort trying to get him to stop. So I've just written him off as a useless kook.

[Bottled_Spider]

I think there should be an awful lot less of all this "Get thee behind me, Blofeld" and a whole load more "Come on in, me old mate, and have a cup of tea". What you vicious trolls don't realise is that it's guys like him that make Wikipedia what it is today. It's also perhaps worth pointing out that in my opinion he's probably hugely attractive to the opposite sex. So stick that in yer pipes and smoke it.
P.S.
And he's Welsh. A Celtic brother. Third cousin at the very least.

[EricBarbour]

What you vicious trolls don't realise is that it's guys like him that make Wikipedia what it is today.

Yeah, an ugly mess.

It's also perhaps worth pointing out that in my opinion he's probably hugely attractive to the opposite sex. So stick that in yer pipes and smoke it.

Prove it......if he can "pull birds" easily, why
is he spending 14 hours a day on Wikipedia?
Every day, 10 AM to around midnight....

This post has been edited by EricBarbour: Wed 4th February 2009, 9:31pm

[Apathetic]

a simple case of article-creation-count-itis

[Viridae]

Except that they are probobly unwatched BLPs there isn't any harm in creating stubs, because ip editors can't create articles so have to either request it or wait till someone else makes it before being able to add and expand.

[Bottled_Spider]

It's also perhaps worth pointing out that in my opinion he's probably hugely attractive to the opposite sex. So stick that in yer pipes and smoke it.

Prove it......if he can "pull birds" easily, why
is he spending 14 hours a day on Wikipedia?
Every day, 10 AM to around midnight....

I'm sure you've heard of the old saying "pulling a bird and writing an encyclopaedia with one stone"? That's him, that is.

Curiously, this practice is also referenced in the 'Kama Sutra', the full-colour "shagtastic" Holy sex manual of the middle ages, or Victorian times or whenever (position 47, plate XVIIb). If one suspends one's disbelief and closes one eye one can almost perhaps maybe clearly see the expert practitioners "holding position" to facilitate good pelvic thrust whilst at the same time freeing one hand for keyboard use. Where there's a will there's a way (plate XII-4).

[everyking]

Except that they are probobly unwatched BLPs there isn't any harm in creating stubs, because ip editors can't create articles so have to either request it or wait till someone else makes it before being able to add and expand.

What if they contain errors? I think there's harm. I still haven't gotten around to checking all of the articles and fixing everything. Really, if you don't know a person's gender, you shouldn't be writing the article.

This post has been edited by everyking: Thu 5th February 2009, 5:08am

[cyofee]

Except that they are probobly unwatched BLPs there isn't any harm in creating stubs, because ip editors can't create articles so have to either request it or wait till someone else makes it before being able to add and expand.

If all those IP editors really want to add to nonexistant articles so much, why don't they, like, register? It only takes half a minute and you can do it up to six times a day. It actually takes less time to register than to make a good request for article creation.

[Giggy]

Finally, he appears to have achieved the distinction of possessing the most Myspace-like userpage on Wikipedia. Truly a prince among men.

I wasted good bandwidth attempting to verify this claim.

[A Horse With No Name]

Recently I noticed that User:Dr. Blofeld had created a large number of articles on members of the Gabonese National Assembly. These articles were created without any individual research; Dr. Blofield simply went down a list of names, creating a substub for each name on the list. I work on that subject area and was annoyed at the extra work I needed to do to clean up these articles. I was annoyed to see that in some cases the gender of the individuals was given wrongly, that the wording was confusing, and that the formatting was bad, but mainly I was annoyed that these articles were created in complete ignorance of their subjects--some of these people are quite notable politicians, but the most important aspects of their careers received no mention in Blofeld's substubs. Since he has created more than 10,000 articles in total, I can only assume that he does this kind of thing all the time.

So I went to complain, noting my appreciation of the effort but urging him to "try to put some individual thought into the articles you create". Blofeld reverted my message. Later I complained again, and this time he called me a "dumb smuck" and acted as though my well-intentioned complaint was deeply insulting. Personally, I think if you create error-ridden, cookie-cutter substubs you should be prepared to accept a little criticism and cooperate with people who are trying to improve what you created. Ultimately I responded to him on my talk page since he deleted everything I wrote on his talk page.

Is this kind of cookie-cutter article production acceptable, even if the articles contain various minor problems? I think editors should engage in a modicum of actual research before adding an article to the mainspace. I think that's part of the responsibility that goes along with being an editor.

I think I saw somewhere that Dr. Blofeld has started more articles than anyone else in en.Wikipedia. He seems to be on a mission.

Yeah, Blofeld and his sidekick Editorofthewiki really need to turn off their computers and get some fresh air.

[everyking]

Yeah, Blofeld and his sidekick Editorofthewiki really need to turn off their computers and get some fresh air.

I've had only good experiences interacting with Editorofthewiki, and whenever I see him around he's working hard to expand existing articles, so I'm not sure that's fair.