Vijay Bahadur Singh, How Wikipedia fails to protect articles from libellous additions Options

[A Horse With No Name]

As usual, the Wikipedia Panto winds up with various foreheads being knocked together in melodious clunks. Never mind that the basic problem first raised by RHMED - the ease of deliberate vandalism of a BLP - got lost in the fracas. This would not be tolerated in the real world of encyclopedia publishing, where professional editors and writers go to great lengths to ensure accurate contents.

But, then again, who can be bothered "building" an encyclopedia when there's fun to be had in shooing away untouchables from the Jimboville sandbox? Is it any wonder that the wider world viewed the tenth anniversary of Wikipedia's launch with an indifferent yawn?

[Sxeptomaniac]

No shocker in any of this. WP has encouraged edit counts as a basic equivalent to experience points, by making the main criteria for becoming an admin a high edit count over a relatively short period of time. It's no wonder they have so many who don't pay attention to what they are doing.

[melloden]

Jasper Deng ... the epitome of fucking dumbass wikiretards.

[thekohser]

Jasper's chess club page shows that he's very suitable for Wikipedia.

[Sxeptomaniac]

Jasper Deng ... the epitome of fucking dumbass wikiretards.

He does seem quite focused on making a name for himself with the Wikiquette quick-response and vandal-fighting. WP would be better off without those types, but they tend to run the show.

[Alison]

Jasper Deng ... the epitome of fucking dumbass wikiretards.

He does seem quite focused on making a name for himself with the Wikiquette quick-response and vandal-fighting. WP would be better off without those types, but they tend to run the show.

http://moultonlava.blogspot.com/2011/04/wikiday.html

Speaking of. Can we have Moulton back on here now, please?

[melloden]

Jasper Deng ... the epitome of fucking dumbass wikiretards.

He does seem quite focused on making a name for himself with the Wikiquette quick-response and vandal-fighting. WP would be better off without those types, but they tend to run the show.

Not Deng, as far as I can tell. He just seems to be a plain idiot. The only name he's making for himself is, "block me! block me! I'm a douchebag who doesn't understand how Wikipedia works because I act like a twelve-year-old imbecile!".

[Jack Merridew]

This was all rather amusing; not as amusing as Horsey's shite as Regent of the Seatopians, though; epic-fail, Cas.

[A Horse With No Name]

This was all rather amusing; not as amusing as Horsey's shite as Regent of the Seatopians, though; epic-fail, Cas.

Yeah, that was a good 10-month gallop as Regent. Obviously ol' Doc Liber ain't getting any at home - otherwise he wouldn't be spending his free time checkuser-fishing on Wiki for naughty editors.

[jayvdb]

Vijay Bahadur Singh a one sentence BLP article. An experiment ensues.

Experiment should have considered using WebCitation to preserve the experimental edits, which are now oversighted.

The edits are still visible by admins.

The log for the revision deletion blames the wrong person for the content.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w...y+Bahadur+Singh


This post has been edited by jayvdb: Fri 8th April 2011, 11:55am

[Jack Merridew]

Vijay Bahadur Singh a one sentence BLP article. An experiment ensues.

Experiment should have considered using WebCitation to preserve the experimental edits, which are now oversighted.

The edits are still visible by admins.

The log for the revision deletion blames the wrong person for the content.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w...y+Bahadur+Singh

wonders why I can still get this:

In October 2010 Singh was investigated for alleged corruption charges relating to pay offs from various companies in exchange for government contracts.<ref>{{cite news|last=Mallabar|first=Raj|accessdate=2 April 2011|newspaper=[[The Times of India]]|date=23 October 2010}}</ref> The result of the subsequent parliamentary investigation resulted in Singh paying a 2.5 million [[Rupee]] fine.<ref>{{cite news|last=Lankar|first=Shammi|accessdate=4 April 2011|newspaper=[[The Indian Express]]|date=March 29, 2011}}</ref>

... Oh, right, Jimbeau is one of mine, as is teh whole AC ;0)

and fyi, the cites that remain are busted, so it's all unsourced. This:

http://www.india.gov.in/govt/loksabhampbio...php?mpcode=4288

could be there, but is not, as is not the info therein.

This was all rather amusing; not as amusing as Horsey's shite as Regent of the Seatopians, though; epic-fail, Cas.

Yeah, that was a good 10-month gallop as Regent. Obviously ol' Doc Liber ain't getting any at home - otherwise he wouldn't be spending his free time checkuser-fishing on Wiki for naughty editors.

well *you're* never getting in aboveboard; that's what Cas is off on.

[A Horse With No Name]

well *you're* never getting in aboveboard; that's what Cas is off on.

Oh, hell, chasing "sockpuppets" is the only exercise that some of the guys ever get. Don't think of us as "banned" editors - think of us as personal trainers!

[thekohser]

This was all rather amusing; not as amusing as Horsey's shite as Regent of the Seatopians, though; epic-fail, Cas.

Yeah, that was a good 10-month gallop as Regent. Obviously ol' Doc Liber ain't getting any at home - otherwise he wouldn't be spending his free time checkuser-fishing on Wiki for naughty editors.

I took a look at a few of the more than 1,000 edits that User:Regent of the Seatopians executed, and I couldn't find a single disruptive one. They all helped improve the Wikipedia project. Yet, the account is banned. This is further proof that Wikipedia's dysfunctional admin community doesn't care two shits about Wikipedia, they care about their power to gatekeep editors.

Not that I support good people like Horsey wasting their time on Wikipedia without some ulterior reward. I hope some of those edits were on behalf of friends, employers, and clients, Horsey?

This post has been edited by thekohser: Fri 8th April 2011, 2:41pm

[A Horse With No Name]

This is further proof that Wikipedia's dysfunctional admin community doesn't care two shits about Wikipedia, they care about their power to gatekeep editors.

Well, you know the saying: any jackass can kick down a door, but only a carpenter can build one.

[Warui desu]

Vijay Bahadur Singh a one sentence BLP article. An experiment ensues.

On April 2 I added this piece of libel, on April 4 I added yet more libel. For both pieces of libel a reference was added, a quick check would have shown that the references were bogus, this didn't happen, even though "(Tag: possible BLP issue or vandalism)" appeared as an edit summary after the first addition of libel.

Did you receive permission from the person in question before conducting your experiment? If not, how can you justify it, and what is your actual problem with libellous BLPs on wikipedia, if you have no problem with libel?
Unethical experiment is unethical?

[EricBarbour]

Yeah, that was a good 10-month gallop as Regent. Obviously ol' Doc Liber ain't getting any at home - otherwise he wouldn't be spending his free time checkuser-fishing on Wiki for naughty editors.

I took a look at a few of the more than 1,000 edits that User:Regent of the Seatopians executed, and I couldn't find a single disruptive one. They all helped improve the Wikipedia project. Yet, the account is banned. This is further proof that Wikipedia's dysfunctional admin community doesn't care two shits about Wikipedia, they care about their power to gatekeep editors.

I am presuming that Horse, too, conducted a "breaching experiment".
And intends to document it shortly.

And as for Cas Liber: that statement could easily be accurate.
The semen backs up into the brain, etc. The Wikipedia Disease.