Wikimedia UK's Fæ, A new name for an old face Options

[Alison]

And who created the article, "List of Gay bathhouse regulars"? Ash (T-C-L-K-R-D) did, of course.

Is there a publicly-viewable page that indicates Ash (T-C-L-K-R-D) created that page? Now that it's deleted, I don't immediately see how you check who created it. Or, is that an admin-only function? If admin-only, could I get a screen shot for proof, please?

No there isn't, as it's admin-only. Here's a screenshot, though, which is the best I could do;



Interesting that someone originally PRODded it, but Benjiboi swooped in a few minutes later to remove the tag

[TungstenCarbide]

[/url]
Description Man in stress position.jpg
English: Man in stress position or partial suspension bondage.
Date 4 November 2008(2008-11-04)
Source Own work
Author Teahot

... (and Van Haeften clearly saw the writing on the wall).

Or maybe the stomach.

the image is gone. Only jimbo is left

(show/hide) 15:45, 26 November 2011 Blurpeace (talk | contribs | block) deleted "File:Man in stress position.jpg" ‎ (User requested) (view/restore) (global usage; delinker log)

Damn, Wikipedia Loves censorship when it suits their agenda.

[mbz1]

[/url]
Description Man in stress position.jpg
English: Man in stress position or partial suspension bondage.
Date 4 November 2008(2008-11-04)
Source Own work
Author Teahot

... (and Van Haeften clearly saw the writing on the wall).

Or maybe the stomach.

the image is gone. Only jimbo is left

(show/hide) 15:45, 26 November 2011 Blurpeace (talk | contribs | block) deleted "File:Man in stress position.jpg" ‎ (User requested) (view/restore) (global usage; delinker log)

Oh, no, what a pity! And how about a free knowledge? It should not be deleted like that, and now they left such an important article with no illustration

[tarantino]

[/url]
Description Man in stress position.jpg
English: Man in stress position or partial suspension bondage.
Date 4 November 2008(2008-11-04)
Source Own work
Author Teahot

... (and Van Haeften clearly saw the writing on the wall).

Or maybe the stomach.

the image is gone. Only jimbo is left

(show/hide) 15:45, 26 November 2011 Blurpeace (talk | contribs | block) deleted "File:Man in stress position.jpg" ‎ (User requested) (view/restore) (global usage; delinker log)

Oh, no, what a pity! And how about a free knowledge? It should not be deleted like that, and now they left such an important article with no illustration

Ash released the image to the public domain, and Webcite still remembers it.

[Cla68]

Damn, Wikipedia Loves censorship when it suits their agenda.

Does this mean that "User:Fæ" reads WR?

[Peter Damian]

Is this within the general rules observed in Commons? The fact that VH took the picture would not be enough to have it deleted, because of the terms of the licence. If it was actually him in the picture, then privacy might be sufficient. But then he gave permission for the picture to be released, so does that apply? And if it wasn't him in the picture, but took the picture or simply uploaded it, then wanting the picture deleted to prevent embarrassment to a director of WMUK is not sufficient reason either.

I am going onto Commons right now to demand that information must be free.

[edit] I have started a discussion here http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=63058705

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Sun 27th November 2011, 9:52am

[mbz1]

Is this within the general rules observed in Commons? The fact that VH took the picture would not be enough to have it deleted, because of the terms of the licence. If it was actually him in the picture, then privacy might be sufficient. But then he gave permission for the picture to be released, so does that apply? And if it wasn't him in the picture, but took the picture or simply uploaded it, then wanting the picture deleted to prevent embarrassment to a director of WMUK is not sufficient reason either.

I am going onto Commons right now to demand that information must be free.

[edit] I have started a discussion here http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=63058705

No, this is not within the general rules observed in Commons. Images as donations cannot be taken away. If for one reason or another an uploader wants the image off, the image should be nominated on deletion and most of the times it will not get deleted.

[carbuncle]

Looks like the cat is out of the bag on WP:

Were you previously User:Ash?
I ask because I remember this RFC on the user (Ash departed wikipedia under a cloud.) [1]. There seems to be rather strong evidence that you and Ash are one and the same. Maybe a redirect from the old account and a talk merge, as was done with Teahot, is in order?Bali ultimate (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

[mbz1]

Looks like the cat is out of the bag on WP:

Were you previously User:Ash?
I ask because I remember this RFC on the user (Ash departed wikipedia under a cloud.) [1]. There seems to be rather strong evidence that you and Ash are one and the same. Maybe a redirect from the old account and a talk merge, as was done with Teahot, is in order?Bali ultimate (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Some administrators doing their best in order to cover up their prior accounts.
For example Gwen Gale used account The Witch. But she does not like it to be redirected to her current account.

Of course all her talk page history from this account and other sock accounts was deleted against all wikipedia rules.

Everything that was left from the talk history of the Witch was a small single ... period, yes a period like this one ".".
Still the stupidest Gwen's lackey removed even this small period with an edit summary "courtesy blanked" , but Gwen bravely undid that "courtesy blanking" with edit summary: "thanks Daedalus but it's not needed : )"
I wish somebody would have asked Gwen why the Witch is not redirected to her current account. After all the Witch was used to violate Gwen's topic ban on gays and lesbian topics, and then Gwen lied about using the Witch account in both of her RfAs.

This post has been edited by mbz1: Sun 27th November 2011, 6:40pm

[thekohser]

Barbara Streisand Effect about to take effect on Monday morning, on Examiner.com.

Ashley Van Haeften, if you wish to discuss how this will be portrayed in my story, you have 20 hours to contact me.

Gregory Kohs
National Wiki Edits Examiner

[mbz1]

And who created the article, "List of Gay bathhouse regulars"? Ash (T-C-L-K-R-D) did, of course.

Yes, as well as Pleasuredrome (T-H-L-K-D) and Chariots Shoreditch (T-H-L-K-D)
and List of films featuring gay bathhouses (T-H-L-K-D)
that are advertising gay saunas.
He also created quite a few articles about pornographic actors (Who could have thought pornographic actors are so notable that they should have Wikipedia's entries but I guess for a free knowledge it's OK.

What I cannot understand how come that Fæ, who started his contributions on 28 March 2010 with creating redirect for "Fairy (gay slang)", could have had a successful RfA just a year later.

I've always thought that about 3 years of positive contributions are required before passing RfA.

Question to Larry Sanger.
Larry, I know that you are not with Citizendium anymore, but probably you'd know response to my question that I am asking out of a simple curiosity.

Let's say I'd make an account with Citizendium, providing my real name and other required information. Let's say I'd write a well sourced article like this one Pleasuredrome (T-H-L-K-D). Would it be allowed to stay in Citizendium ? Thanks.

This post has been edited by mbz1: Sun 27th November 2011, 9:20pm

[Kelly Martin]

I've always thought that about 3 years of positive contributions are required before passing RfA.

Where'd you get that idea? Three months is enough if you have sucked all the right cocks.

[the fieryangel]

With Benjiboi, we had a smoking gun in that he had Dj'd at a party given by Michael Lucas that was hosted by Sister Roma, who both work in the Porn industry. The connections were obvious (Sisters of Perputual Indulgence, SF chapter: Sister

From this, it's quite obvious that our friend Ash has gay porn on the brain. Many gay men do. However, I'm not seeing the connection to the porn ndustry, other than these articles created. It could be that he's just doing this to gain access to these gay porn stars via their blogs etc. However, he seems to spend an awful lot of time doing this stuff just to be a "fanboi".

I'm wondering exactly what the company that he's susposed to work for actually does? Maybe he does promotional work for gay porn studios?

In any case, I'd like to find this "missing link"...

[carbuncle]

With Benjiboi, we had a smoking gun in that he had Dj'd at a party given by Michael Lucas that was hosted by Sister Roma, who both work in the Porn industry. The connections were obvious (Sisters of Perputual Indulgence, SF chapter: Sister

From this, it's quite obvious that our friend Ash has gay porn on the brain. Many gay men do. However, I'm not seeing the connection to the porn ndustry, other than these articles created. It could be that he's just doing this to gain access to these gay porn stars via their blogs etc. However, he seems to spend an awful lot of time doing this stuff just to be a "fanboi".

I'm wondering exactly what the company that he's susposed to work for actually does? Maybe he does promotional work for gay porn studios?

In any case, I'd like to find this "missing link"...

It was always my feeling that Ash's interest in gay porn performers (and English bathhouses) was personal rather than professional. It may also have been partly ideological as well, since both he and Benjiboi were quick to throw out insinuations of homophobia about those who were trying to get rid of the worst of the gay porn BLPs. I never found any indication that Ash had a professional connection to porn studios (but I wasn't really looking for one, either).

[TungstenCarbide]

Barbara Streisand Effect about to take effect on Monday morning, on Examiner.com.

Ashley Van Haeften, if you wish to discuss how this will be portrayed in my story, you have 20 hours to contact me.

Gregory Kohs
National Wiki Edits Examiner

can't wait

[carbuncle]

I've always thought that about 3 years of positive contributions are required before passing RfA.

Where'd you get that idea? Three months is enough if you have sucked all the right cocks.

See this ANI thread entitled "Admin conduct review requested", which suggests that rather soon after his successful RfA, there were rumblings from fellow admins about whether or not he should have been given the tools. I'm not suggesting that the fix was in, but it's clear that the RfA was tainted by the somewhat disingenuous statements by ArbCom member John Vandenberg about Van Haeften's earlier accounts.

[EricBarbour]

See this ANI thread entitled "Admin conduct review requested"

That was started by Xenophrenic (T-C-L-K-R-D) .

Ever looked at Xenophrenic's userpage history? It's fascinating.

(cur | prev) 00:06, 10 November 2007‎ Chaser (talk | contribs)‎ m (empty) (Changed protection level for "User:Xenophrenic": reducing per editor's request; editor's block log indicates Gnangarra no longer believes him to be a sockpuppet, so original reason for protection is mute [edit=autoconfirmed:move=sysop])
(cur | prev) 04:55, 20 February 2007‎ Gnangarra (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (remove sockpuppet tag from user)
(cur | prev) 14:29, 16 February 2007‎ Gnangarra (talk | contribs)‎ (145 bytes) (sockpuppetproven)
(cur | prev) 14:10, 16 February 2007‎ Gnangarra (talk | contribs)‎ (139 bytes) (fix link to sockpuppeteer)
(cur | prev) 14:04, 16 February 2007‎ Gnangarra (talk | contribs)‎ m (138 bytes) (Protected User:Xenophrenic: sockpuppet - confirmed by checkuser, user keeps removing tag violating probation [edit=sysop:move=sysop])
(cur | prev) 14:02, 16 February 2007‎ Gnangarra (talk | contribs)‎ (138 bytes) (sockpupet tag added with links to decisions)
(cur | prev) 13:49, 16 February 2007‎ Gnangarra (talk | contribs)‎ m (17 bytes) (Reverted edits by Xenophrenic (talk) to last version by TDC)
(cur | prev) 03:22, 16 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Removed vandalism. Please cease.)
(cur | prev) 03:11, 16 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes)
(cur | prev) 02:06, 16 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Removed vandalism.)
(cur | prev) 00:12, 16 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (rv)
(cur | prev) 17:26, 14 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Vandalism removed.)
(cur | prev) 12:39, 14 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (leave the tag be or I will have the page protected)
(cur | prev) 08:23, 14 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Removed vandalism.)
(cur | prev) 03:40, 14 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (the jury is in Rob, and you are most certainly a sock)
(cur | prev) 06:29, 13 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Removed vandalism.)
(cur | prev) 21:11, 12 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (see talk, Rob, three admins agree with me on this one, this is a legitimate tag)
(cur | prev) 21:01, 12 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Removed vandalism.)
(cur | prev) 20:43, 12 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (its right in your block log Rob, if you disagree take it up with the admins who sanctioned you)
(cur | prev) 20:14, 12 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Stop the vandalism, Rob. Last warning.)
(cur | prev) 16:32, 12 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (rob, leave it be, this is now a well established fact)
(cur | prev) 20:42, 10 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Removed userpage vandalism again, please cease)
(cur | prev) 13:43, 10 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (it is now beyond a doubt)
(cur | prev) 16:51, 8 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Removed vandalism)
(cur | prev) 12:16, 8 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes)
(cur | prev) 08:40, 8 February 2007‎ Xenophrenic (talk | contribs)‎ (empty) (Very funny)
(cur | prev) 23:17, 7 February 2007‎ TDC (talk | contribs)‎ (17 bytes) (←Created page with '{{Sockpuppeteer}}')

This post has been edited by EricBarbour: Mon 28th November 2011, 7:13am

[mbz1]

Looks like the cat is out of the bag on WP:

Were you previously User:Ash?
I ask because I remember this RFC on the user (Ash departed wikipedia under a cloud.) [1]. There seems to be rather strong evidence that you and Ash are one and the same. Maybe a redirect from the old account and a talk merge, as was done with Teahot, is in order?Bali ultimate (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I'm now convinced that you and User:Ash are one and the same. This makes it crystal clear [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Simon_Corcoran&action=history]. How do you propose that this be handled going forward? Certainly knowledge of your editing as both User:Ash and User:Teahot would have been relevant to your RFA -- and, perhaps (one can hope) to your appointment to Wikimedia's UK board of directors. I'll probably bring this to a broader venue soonish.[[User:Bali ultimate|Bali ultimate]] ([[User talk:Bali ultimate|talk]]) 13:01, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

[thekohser]

Fæ was previously known as User:Ash. Prior to that, they were Ashleyvh and Teahot.

Is there iron-clad evidence of the Ashleyvh --> Teahot --> Ash --> Fæ chain of name-changing?

[Eppur si muove]

Fæ was previously known as User:Ash. Prior to that, they were Ashleyvh and Teahot.

Is there iron-clad evidence of the Ashleyvh --> Teahot --> Ash --> Fæ chain of name-changing?

There is for the first two. Looking at user (talk) pages

12:09, 15 April 2009 Anonymous Dissident (Talk | contribs) moved User:Ashleyvh to User:Teahot ‎ (Automatically moved page while renaming the user "Ashleyvh" to "Teahot") (revert)

02:43, 27 July 2009 Kingturtle (Talk | contribs) moved User talk:Teahot to User talk:Ash ‎ (Automatically moved page while renaming the user "Teahot" to "Ash") (revert)

The rest involves inferences from the first user name and edit patterns.