Cirt revisited Options

[Zoloft]

Sure, there's a whole, professional page where Hochman admits to paid editing.

Try this, more specific.

Meh, not really. Just a page of google results, the top one seems the most germane, but the documents listed that have Wikipedia in the title don't tie Hochman to paid editing.

Damning evidence?

"SEO consultant Jonathan Hochman has edited Wikipedia since 2005 and counts more than a thousand edits under his belt. Rather than doing the job for clients, he participates in Wikipedia for recreation and making friends. While he believes that Wikipedia's policy of restricting contributions to disinterested parties is not particularly pragmatic, he advocates the overall objective: To make valuable, notable contributions from as neutral a point of view as is possible, incorporate reliable sources, and never permit spam."

From http://www.practicalecommerce.com/articles...-Your-Business-

Not so much.

<cubagoodingjr> Show me the money! </cubagoodingjr>

[thekohser]

Somebody contact Hochman privately, offer him $500 for a Wikipedia article about someone like Kayslee Collins, and then preserve his exact rejection of the offer, and then I'll retract my claim.

[Jagärdu]

Is there something else I can read on Hochman's connection to paid editing or is this just something you're throwing around right now?

Sure, there's a whole, professional page where Hochman admits to paid editing.

I notice you make no similar demands for proof about Cirt's paid editing.

I've been part of discussions concerning the possibility of Cirt being a paid editor (in fact I've made that suggestion myself possibly in this very thread) ... so no I'm not particularly interested in rehashing that. I'm not sure I believe he gets paid anymore either after it has been shown that pretty much every random looking article he puffs up has ties to ex-Scientologists or the opponents of Scientologists. I was curious about Hochman ... though I see nothing more than idle speculation so far. Where is the money indeed?

This post has been edited by Jagärdu: Thu 16th December 2010, 9:30pm

[tarantino]

I'm a bit surprised that no-one has called "bullshit" on Jehochman's very blatant attempts to run interference for Cirt in this matter. Along with the above charade, he also tried telling editors discussing the matter in a light not favorable to Cirt at AN/I to "please stop now and drop it." This is of course, while he tried desperately to control the AE discussion ...

quote Jehochman: It is just plain nasty to stress somebody during Christmas. Jehochman Talk 04:17, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

What a shlemiel! Does he really think Cirt celebrates Christmas?

[Milton Roe]

I'm a bit surprised that no-one has called "bullshit" on Jehochman's very blatant attempts to run interference for Cirt in this matter. Along with the above charade, he also tried telling editors discussing the matter in a light not favorable to Cirt at AN/I to "please stop now and drop it." This is of course, while he tried desperately to control the AE discussion ...

quote Jehochman: It is just plain nasty to stress somebody during Christmas. Jehochman Talk 04:17, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

What a shlemiel! Does he really think Cirt celebrates Christmas?

Along with Jayjg. Hanukkah Zombie (golum?) comes down the chimney for latkes and milk. I saw it on Futurama.

[Jagärdu]

I'm a bit surprised that no-one has called "bullshit" on Jehochman's very blatant attempts to run interference for Cirt in this matter. Along with the above charade, he also tried telling editors discussing the matter in a light not favorable to Cirt at AN/I to "please stop now and drop it." This is of course, while he tried desperately to control the AE discussion ...

quote Jehochman: It is just plain nasty to stress somebody during Christmas. Jehochman Talk 04:17, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

What a shlemiel! Does he really think Cirt celebrates Christmas?

I sort of assumed Hochman didn't celebrate Christmas either. I do love that he's calling carbuncle's planned AE request "plain nasty". You're such a jerk carbuncle! Stop picking on Cirt during Christmas.

[Doc glasgow]

Scientology coatracks?

Meade Emory

Peter Moon (author)

Need I say more?

[lilburne]

Scientology coatracks?

Meade Emory

Peter Moon (author)

Need I say more?

Whothey?

[HRIP7]

Scientology coatracks?

Meade Emory

Peter Moon (author)

Need I say more?

Nice vandalism revert.

Delicious Carbuncle filed at AE earlier today; the filing was removed by Fut. Perf. half an hour later, on the grounds that the appealed sanction was still in force. The sanction against DC has since been overturned.

[Doc glasgow]

Scientology coatracks?

Meade Emory

Peter Moon (author)

Need I say more?

Nice vandalism revert.

Delicious Carbuncle filed at AE earlier today; the filing was removed by Fut. Perf. half an hour later, on the grounds that the appealed sanction was still in force. The sanction against DC has since been overturned.

Good grief, I missed that. That's outrageous.

[carbuncle]

Good grief, I missed that. That's outrageous.

If you are even surprised by this, Doc, then I guess you aren't as clued in to the depth of the problem as I thought you were. This is only scratching the surface.

Part of the problem is that Cirt is an admin and has a reputation as a good content editor, so people assume that their edits are kosher. Take a look at Michael Doven, an article which has been brought up a few times already as an example. News of the World as a source in a BLP? An "unauthorised biography" that wasn't published in the UK because of the inevitable libel cases also used as a source?

Unofficial WP Scientology attack dog or not, it is a mystery to me how Cirt has been allowed to get away with this much blatant abuse of policy for so long.

[HRIP7]

Scientology coatracks?

Meade Emory

Peter Moon (author)

Need I say more?

Nice vandalism revert.

Delicious Carbuncle filed at AE earlier today; the filing was removed by Fut. Perf. half an hour later, on the grounds that the appealed sanction was still in force. The sanction against DC has since been overturned.

Good grief, I missed that. That's outrageous.

Here a novice user tried to remove Jada Pinkett-Smith from "List of Scientologists". She was listed as a member, even though there are plentiful and easily sourceable denials like this one. That too was reverted as vandalism.

The user, Passomouse (T-C-L-K-R-D) , made several edits related to Will Smith and Jada Pinkett-Smith, and I am not saying they are all perfect. They too were reverted as vandalism, and their user talk page was quickly filled with warnings from Cirt. Passomouse told Cirt they had contacted Pinkett-Smith's PR office, who had confirmed she is not a Scientologist. Cirt's response was this. Pinkett-Smith was not removed until much later, along with other non-Scientologists such as Gloria Gaynor and Chaka Khan, after an RfC, BLPN threads, Jimbo weighing in and lots of wrangling and halfway-house solutions on the talk page.

The thing with Smith, by the way, is that he has supported some Scientology charities, but self-identifies as Christian. He supports charities by all sorts of religions, and the vast majority goes to Christian charities. Yet the ones that receive prominent mention in Wikipedia are invariably those that involve Scientology.

This post has been edited by HRIP7: Fri 17th December 2010, 4:22pm

[HRIP7]

Incidentally, Cirt used Twinkle, not Rollback, on those reverts.

[Jagärdu]

I'm flabbergasted. Jehochman has now single handedly denied carbuncle's AE request. "Brazen" doesn't even begin to describe this nonsense. Someone ought to permanently ban Jehochman from ever taking admin action or commenting as an "uninvolved admin" in any matter related to Cirt. Of course that would be too practical for anyone on Wikipedia to consider.

Addendum:

Hochman's comments to Scott Mac are pretty hilarious. First he says that Cirt is just one of many "wiki-friends" to downplay any bias, then he speaks for Cirt saying, "Scott. Cirt feels you've been in editorial conflict with him." Where does he say that Hochman, because I can't see it anywhere? Oh I get it he must have poked you on Facebook to give you a heads up that he was texting you about it later. You're clearly not great friends, I mean I speak for the feelings of my casual acquaintances all the time based on what they tell me in private correspondences.

This post has been edited by Jagärdu: Fri 17th December 2010, 7:57pm

[carbuncle]

I'm flabbergasted. Jehochman has now single handedly denied carbuncle's AE request. "Brazen" doesn't even begin to describe this nonsense. Someone ought to permanently ban Jehochman from ever taking admin action or commenting as an "uninvolved admin" in any matter related to Cirt. Of course that would be too practical for anyone on Wikipedia to consider.

Addendum:

Hochman's comments to Scott Mac are pretty hilarious. First he says that Cirt is just one of many "wiki-friends" to downplay any bias, then he speaks for Cirt saying, "Scott. Cirt feels you've been in editorial conflict with him." Where does he say that Hochman, because I can't see it anywhere? Oh I get it he must have poked you on Facebook to give you a heads up that he was texting you about it later. You're clearly not great friends, I mean I speak for the feelings of my casual acquaintances all the time based on what they tell me in private correspondences.

Are you suggesting that Cirt and Jehochman had off-wiki communication wherein Jehochman agreed to close out the arbitration request for Cirt? I can't imagine that two respected WP admins would act in such an underhanded fashion, but it would explain why Cirt took what is for them an unusually long break from WP but started editing again immediately after Jehochman's attempted closure.

[Jagärdu]

I'm flabbergasted. Jehochman has now single handedly denied carbuncle's AE request. "Brazen" doesn't even begin to describe this nonsense. Someone ought to permanently ban Jehochman from ever taking admin action or commenting as an "uninvolved admin" in any matter related to Cirt. Of course that would be too practical for anyone on Wikipedia to consider.

Addendum:

Hochman's comments to Scott Mac are pretty hilarious. First he says that Cirt is just one of many "wiki-friends" to downplay any bias, then he speaks for Cirt saying, "Scott. Cirt feels you've been in editorial conflict with him." Where does he say that Hochman, because I can't see it anywhere? Oh I get it he must have poked you on Facebook to give you a heads up that he was texting you about it later. You're clearly not great friends, I mean I speak for the feelings of my casual acquaintances all the time based on what they tell me in private correspondences.

Are you suggesting that Cirt and Jehochman had off-wiki communication wherein Jehochman agreed to close out the arbitration request for Cirt? I can't imagine that two respected WP admins would act in such an underhanded fashion, but it would explain why Cirt took what is for them an unusually long break from WP but started editing again immediately after Jehochman's attempted closure.

Cirt and Jhochman have clearly been in communication off-wiki this entire time. For instance Cirt's appeals to collaborate with you are 100% Hochman's advice, and I don't just mean what he wrote on-wiki. I have no way to prove this of course. He's obviously trying desperately to help Cirt make this go away in several ways, but in my mind he's failing rather miserably, and indeed exposing himself to a whole lot of smelly shit. The fact that Hochman spoke for Cirt's feelings about Scott Mac is but an indication of their off-wiki communicating. Of course, maybe I'm wrong. If someone can find the diff where Cirt made the assertion on-wiki I'll stand corrected, but I highly doubt it exists.

This post has been edited by Jagärdu: Fri 17th December 2010, 8:52pm

[Milton Roe]

I'm flabbergasted. Jehochman has now single handedly denied carbuncle's AE request. "Brazen" doesn't even begin to describe this nonsense. Someone ought to permanently ban Jehochman from ever taking admin action or commenting as an "uninvolved admin" in any matter related to Cirt. Of course that would be too practical for anyone on Wikipedia to consider.

It's just the usual WP Jews-helping-Jews. What are you, antisemitic? I'll bet you're antisemitic. Otherwise you wouldn't mind that Jews help Jews on WP, to the detriment of anybody-else. You'd just welcome it as a part of Wikidiversity. It's all the cycle of life...

Admit it. You admire Hitler, don't you? Otherwise you'd just leave this whole mess alone.

As for myself, everytime I mention the very obviousness of Jews-helping-Jews on WP, I myself am suspected of admiring Hitler. That's part of the game, don't you know. Say anything about any of this, and you're part of a hate group.

Milton the Hater. That's me.

[HRIP7]

Scientology coatracks?

Meade Emory

Peter Moon (author)

Need I say more?

Nice vandalism revert.

Delicious Carbuncle filed at AE earlier today; the filing was removed by Fut. Perf. half an hour later, on the grounds that the appealed sanction was still in force. The sanction against DC has since been overturned.

Good grief, I missed that. That's outrageous.

Actually, Cirt not only reverted Ajpropst (T-C-L-K-R-D) , but also had them blocked as a BLP vandal.

[carbuncle]

Scientology coatracks?

Meade Emory

Peter Moon (author)

Need I say more?

Whothey?

It appears that Meade Emory killed L Ron Hubbard or something (I'm not really sure what they are trying to say and I have no desire to read a bunch of stuff about Scientology infighting).

There are a whole bunch of BLPs that exist solely to label people as Scientologists. Let me mention Jeff Pomerantz as an example and see what happens. I'm sure a lot of people from WP are reading this thread since DocJames keeps linking to it.

DocJames, why don't you take a look at Pomerantz's BLP and ask yourself why it is even on WP? Why is he in the category "American Scientologists" even though that is a violation of WP:BLPCAT? Look at the discussion on talk page - this was identified as a coatrack article in June, but any changes stymied by User:Coffeepusher, an editor who has an anti-Scientology remark on their userpage. Go ahead, AfD it and see what happens.

[lilburne]

Those articles can only ever be negative or positive, there is simply not enough information, nor are they important enough in their own right to have any full blown article. As sucuh they can only ever exist as some non-speaking extra in relation to something else.