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

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

9 Pages V « < 7 8 9  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Ask the Leaker, Go ask Malice, I think he'll know
Sololol
post Tue 30th August 2011, 5:28am
Post #161


Bell the Cat
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun 10th Apr 2011, 6:32am
Member No.: 50,538

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Sololol @ Fri 19th August 2011, 1:14am) *


Can't blame him. Hopefully we've not seen the last of him.



Was it released in the secret forum?

Judging by the conspicuous lack of regulars posting in this sub-forum I'm going to assume and hope I'm right.

This post has been edited by Sololol: Tue 30th August 2011, 5:28am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Johnnyt471
post Mon 3rd October 2011, 3:43am
Post #162


Neophyte


Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon 3rd Oct 2011, 3:07am
Member No.: 68,316

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



I don't know if anything new is being leaked (it appears that the leaker hasn't posted in the last few weeks) but...

I'm curious about a few strange episodes in arbcom history. I know that some of the mantanmoreland stuff and the omnibus case have been covered, but I'd like to know a few specific episodes (let me know if this stuff has already been talked about...I couldn't find anything after a few cursory looks):

- Discussions relating to Sam_Blacketer's infamous "Nothing to see here..." motion to dismiss after months of solid evidence and debate in the Omnibus case
- Discussions during the Mantanmoreland case where everyone went apeshit after some arbs inexplicably claimed that the entire sockpuppet episode was probably a year-long secret plot by Bagley, then only giving a vague proposed finding that a "majority of arbs" weren't convinced due to certain unnamed "confounding issues."
- Discussions following jpgordon's demand that jayvdb retire from clerk for daring to block internet warrior Tony_sidaway after he spent far too much time trolling the talk pages

Simply curious here, for I am just a caveman lurker.

Thank you.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
GlassBeadGame
post Mon 3rd October 2011, 4:04am
Post #163


Dharma Bum
*********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 7,919
Joined: Sat 17th Feb 2007, 12:55am
From: My name it means nothing. My age it means less. The country I come from is called the Mid-West.
Member No.: 981



QUOTE(Johnnyt471 @ Sun 2nd October 2011, 9:43pm) *

I don't know if anything new is being leaked (it appears that the leaker hasn't posted in the last few weeks) but...

I'm curious about a few strange episodes in arbcom history. I know that some of the mantanmoreland stuff and the omnibus case have been covered, but I'd like to know a few specific episodes (let me know if this stuff has already been talked about...I couldn't find anything after a few cursory looks):

- Discussions relating to Sam_Blacketer's infamous "Nothing to see here..." motion to dismiss after months of solid evidence and debate in the Omnibus case
- Discussions during the Mantanmoreland case where everyone went apeshit after some arbs inexplicably claimed that the entire sockpuppet episode was probably a year-long secret plot by Bagley, then only giving a vague proposed finding that a "majority of arbs" weren't convinced due to certain unnamed "confounding issues."
- Discussions following jpgordon's demand that jayvdb retire from clerk for daring to block internet warrior Tony_sidaway after he spent far too much time trolling the talk pages

Simply curious here, for I am just a caveman lurker.

Thank you.


Thank you for sharing with us your self absorbed and obsessive Wikipedian concerns. You enrich all of the websites and forums that are permitted to join into your ceaseless conversation. Nothing could be more fascinating.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Johnnyt471
post Mon 3rd October 2011, 4:08am
Post #164


Neophyte


Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon 3rd Oct 2011, 3:07am
Member No.: 68,316

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



the only part of that i will dispute is the word "ceaseless"
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
GlassBeadGame
post Mon 3rd October 2011, 4:15am
Post #165


Dharma Bum
*********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 7,919
Joined: Sat 17th Feb 2007, 12:55am
From: My name it means nothing. My age it means less. The country I come from is called the Mid-West.
Member No.: 981



QUOTE(Johnnyt471 @ Sun 2nd October 2011, 10:08pm) *

the only part of that i will dispute is the word "ceaseless"

We can only hope.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Herschelkrustofsky
post Fri 28th October 2011, 4:39am
Post #166


Member
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,199
Joined: Tue 18th Apr 2006, 12:05pm
From: Kalifornia
Member No.: 130

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Here's a new request, Malice. I got Carcharoth to agree to post the following message to the list in December of '09. I would be interested in seeing what was posted in response to it.

QUOTE
I understand that, despite being banned, I may request the opportunity to comment on this via email. I would like to make the following observations:

1. The tag-team of SlimVirgin and Will Beback has succeeded in controlling any mention of LaRouche at Wikipedia for five years now. Editors who questioned their edits were intimidated and, if plausible circumstantial evidence could be found, blocked as sock- or meatpuppets. They have flouted a whole array of core policies, but as far as the ArbCom is concerned, the most important relevant passage is the following from C68-FM-SV:

"Parties specifically instructed 2.(iv)": Editing by a party in conjunction with one or more other users in a fashion constituting or creating a reasonable perception of excessively coordinated editing or of seeking "ownership" of articles or policies.

2. SlimVirgin and Will Beback have changed their line regarding the article in question. When the controversy over this topic began in 2004, every search engine hit on the internet for the landbridge was to a LaRouche publication, so they claimed at that time was that there was no such thing as the Eurasian Landbridge, that it was strictly a LaRouche fantasy, and so there should be no article about it. Now that there are abundant non-LaRouche sources, their line is that it exists, but LaRouche had nothing to do with it. In order to pursue this line of argument, they resort to the sophist's trick of defining "mainstream sources" as being exclusively English-language sources. Since the landbridge is at present primarily an issue for Russia and Asian countries, it receives scant attention in the English-language press, which is preoccupied with the usual coverage of Tiger Woods and other priority topics. But as far as the rest of the world is concerned, LaRouche's role in the development and dissemination of the proposal is in fact being underplayed in the article as newly written by Cla68. One of the sources used in the article is Asharq al-Awsat, described by Wikipedia as "the leading Arabic international newspaper." In the cited article, there is a statement (not included by Cla68) that
Recent years have witnessed a proliferation of ideas of LaRouche in China and South Asia, as the spiritual father of the draft back to life the new Silk Road or the bridge Eurasia...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

9 Pages V « < 7 8 9
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: 25th 7 14, 3:56pm