Cirt revisited Options

[carbuncle]

You may recall earlier threads discussing Cirt's aggressive anti-Scientology efforts on WP, and the suggestion that Cirt may be a paid editor. A recent thread on ANI involving Cirt's creation of Daryl Wine Bar and Restaurant, which looks like the type of thing an experienced paid editor would write, made me look at the again at the paid editing suggestions.

I suggested an article was a puff piece. Rather than engage in discussion, the article creator has been deleting standard WP procedures for addressing these concerns. Cirt has been both disruptive and using harrassing techniques to defend the article used to advertise the "Daryl restaurant and wine bar." He clearly has a personal interest in the restaurant is is using his position as an administrator abusively. Njsustain (talk) 17:23, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Cirt recently created a ridiculous puff piece for minor actress Jamie Sorrentini. Turns out that Sorrentini is a former Scientologist whose story is told here. One of the partners in Daryl Winebar? Its namesake Daryl Sorrentini, who happens to be the mother of Jamie Sorrentini. Is it possible that Cirt's "paid editing" has really just been an extreme extension of their anti-Scientology editing?

[thekohser]

I notice that the website for the Daryl Wine Bar in New Jersey hasn't really figured out how to display their menus. Maybe Cirt could help them out by posting the menu on their Wikipedia article.

[CharlotteWebb]

Interesting hypocrisy by Cirt, who opposes a user's RFA on the basis that said user has a "history of sanctions".

How much nerve does it take to say this, having passed one's own RFA by failing to disclose one's own "history of sanctions"?

This post has been edited by CharlotteWebb: Thu 28th October 2010, 12:52am

[rockyBarton]

Interesting hypocrisy by Cirt, who opposes a user's RFA on the basis that said user has a "history of sanctions".

How much nerve does it take to say this, having passed one's own RFA by failing to disclose one's own "history of sanctions"?

It appears that Cirt’s shiny new article is being nominated for deletion based on BLP and Coatrack issues: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Art...dcasting_System

[A Horse With No Name]

Interesting hypocrisy by Cirt, who opposes a user's RFA on the basis that said user has a "history of sanctions".

How much nerve does it take to say this, having passed one's own RFA by failing to disclose one's own "history of sanctions"?

It appears that Cirt’s shiny new article is being nominated for deletion based on BLP and Coatrack issues: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Art...dcasting_System

Eh, phooey! Cirt is such a bore!

[carbuncle]

Interesting hypocrisy by Cirt, who opposes a user's RFA on the basis that said user has a "history of sanctions".

How much nerve does it take to say this, having passed one's own RFA by failing to disclose one's own "history of sanctions"?

It appears that Cirt’s shiny new article is being nominated for deletion based on BLP and Coatrack issues: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Art...dcasting_System

Eh, phooey! Cirt is such a bore!

Cirt has left notices about the AFD at a dozen Wikiprojects, not to mention user pages. How does Cirt manage to get away with such overt canvasing?

[HRIP7]

Interesting hypocrisy by Cirt, who opposes a user's RFA on the basis that said user has a "history of sanctions".

How much nerve does it take to say this, having passed one's own RFA by failing to disclose one's own "history of sanctions"?

It appears that Cirt’s shiny new article is being nominated for deletion based on BLP and Coatrack issues: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Art...dcasting_System

Eh, phooey! Cirt is such a bore!

Cirt has left notices about the AFD at a dozen Wikiprojects, not to mention user pages. How does Cirt manage to get away with such overt canvasing?

Cirt is up to her old tricks again. Clever use of the plagiarism and copyright violation meme in the AfD. Of course, guess who placed all those "warnings" ...

[pietkuip]

Cirt is up to her old tricks again. Clever use of the plagiarism and copyright violation meme in the AfD. Of course, guess who placed all those "warnings" ...

On Commons, he tagged photos of the covers of the Book of Mormon for copyright infringement... - it is just a few words, that never were copyrighted anyway. Looks mostly like harassment of the contributors.

[Lar]

On Commons, he tagged photos of the covers of the Book of Mormon for copyright infringement... - it is just a few words, that never were copyrighted anyway. Looks mostly like harassment of the contributors.

Of course harassing people on Commons via allegations of copyvio isn't something you'd know anything about, is it?

[pietkuip]

On Commons, he tagged photos of the covers of the Book of Mormon for copyright infringement... - it is just a few words, that never were copyrighted anyway. Looks mostly like harassment of the contributors.

Of course harassing people on Commons via allegations of copyvio isn't something you'd know anything about, is it?

You abused your admin buttons to block me when I made deletion requests of your uploads. Those DRs were in line with Commons policy. This one ended in delete; this one was kept by your cronies. But it is good to have such an example, to counter the deletionism on Commons.

[Lar]

On Commons, he tagged photos of the covers of the Book of Mormon for copyright infringement... - it is just a few words, that never were copyrighted anyway. Looks mostly like harassment of the contributors.

Of course harassing people on Commons via allegations of copyvio isn't something you'd know anything about, is it?

You abused your admin buttons to block me when I made deletion requests of your uploads. Those DRs were in line with Commons policy. This one ended in delete; this one was kept by your cronies. But it is good to have such an example, to counter the deletionism on Commons.

Your blocks, and they are legion, have nothing to do with your deletion requests, as requests. Merely with your combative nature. You really shouldn't criticize others while your own house is in such disarray.

[pietkuip]

... with your combative nature. You really shouldn't criticize others while your own house is in such disarray.

I do not have much to do combat with. But you have all these hats and buttons. When I made a DR of your uploads, you knocked me down with a block. Abuse of power.

And back to the subject - "combative" fits Cirt.

This post has been edited by pietkuip: Thu 9th December 2010, 7:26am

[HRIP7]

And back to the subject - "combative" fits Cirt.

Note Cirt's spat with Scott MacDonald a few days ago. Cirt backed down in the end.

And there is currently an ANI spat between Cirt and Delicious Carbuncle.

While Delicious Carbuncle was in the wrong there as regards the BLP source, he is right for much of the rest. The thing is that in a way this comes a year or two too late -- Cirt is not quite the out-of-control POV warrior any more that s/he was then, and has been far more reasonable of late.

[carbuncle]

And back to the subject - "combative" fits Cirt.

Note Cirt's spat with Scott MacDonald a few days ago. Cirt backed down in the end.

And there is currently an ANI spat between Cirt and Delicious Carbuncle.

While Delicious Carbuncle was in the wrong there as regards the BLP source, he is right for much of the rest. The thing is that in a way this comes a year or two too late -- Cirt is not quite the out-of-control POV warrior any more that s/he was then, and has been far more reasonable of late.

You misread what happened in the dispute between Scott and Cirt. Cirt had managed to stymie any effort to substantially remove obvious puffery from Sorrentini's bio. When Cirt raised the issue about sourcing at the reliable sources noticeboard, the very next thing they did was remove the disputed items so that the article was not tagged with a "POV dispute" template when people went to look at it. Otherwise, I'm sure it would have been removed when Scott gave up arguing about the details of an article that really shouldn't exist anyway. Meaning no offence, this is a minor TV actor with no significant credits, like literally thousands working in television at any one time.

I really do not wish to enable Scientologists to return to WP to push their point of view, but Cirt is being allowed to get away with all kinds of nonsense as WP's anti-Scientology attack dog. There are a number of articles that exist simply to label some otherwise unremarkable business or person as connected to the CoS. This is a systematic use of WP as the classic "organ of revenge", even if it is "far more reasonable of late".