Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Serious admin abuse documented
Wikipedia Review > Media Forums > Wikipedia in Blogland
codswallop
Should arbcom, other admins, and people that know better allow this kind of abuse to continue for years? Why do so many admins, including some people here in this forum, defend this type of thing?

If this person doesn't deserve a permanent and indefinite block, who does?

http://gwengalerevealed.blogspot.com

Let the spin, deflection away from the issue, and stomping of feet begin.



Somey
QUOTE(codswallop @ Sat 20th December 2008, 11:02pm) *
Let the spin, deflection away from the issue, and stomping of feet begin.

Not to mention the moving-of-thread into the proper subforum! smile.gif

I'm guessing the first three or four threads on this subject were somehow insufficient? ermm.gif
jd turk
QUOTE(codswallop @ Sat 20th December 2008, 11:02pm) *

Let the spin, deflection away from the issue, and stomping of feet begin.


Just curious, what could she possibly have done to you that would lead you to spend hours putting this information together in hopes of exposing her lifetime of larceny?

You seem to be quite close to posting pictures taken from the bushes outside her house.
Eva Destruction
QUOTE(jd turk @ Sun 21st December 2008, 7:52am) *

Just curious, what could she possibly have done to you that would lead you to spend hours putting this information together in hopes of exposing her lifetime of larceny?

Something tells me that somewhere in our many-named friend's Wikipedia history, the phrase "I have deleted your article on your band/employer/self, ~~~~ Gwen Gale" appears. I can't think where I get that impression.
Eppur si muove
QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Sun 21st December 2008, 12:12pm) *

Something tells me that somewhere in our many-named friend's Wikipedia history, the phrase "I have deleted your article on your band/employer/self, ~~~~ Gwen Gale" appears. I can't think where I get that impression.


Im sure there's a tale behind the obsession with her being a lesbian feminist.
codswallop
Thanks for proving my point. Deflect, attack the poster, refuse to address the issues presented in the blog.

It is funny how none of you has the balls to actually address the issues in the blog, instead attacking me.

Try growing a pair.




Eva Destruction
QUOTE(codswallop @ Sun 21st December 2008, 3:30pm) *

Thanks for proving my point. Deflect, attack the poster, refuse to address the issues presented in the blog.

It is funny how none of you has the balls to actually address the issues in the blog, instead attacking me.

Try growing a pair.

(I somehow suspect I'm going to regret this, but…)

What…goddamn…issues? I'm no great fan of Gwen's. but you haven't raised any issues. Flick through some threads at random here. Go read ANI on Wikipedia. There is genuine admin abuse on Wikipedia; neither "admin creates a page on herself but doesn't protest when someone else decides it's non-notable", "Wikipedia editor sometimes logs on to edit and sometimes uses their IP" nor "admin deletes a bunch of pages that someone else has tagged for deletion" is a story.
dtobias
QUOTE(codswallop @ Sun 21st December 2008, 10:30am) *

Thanks for proving my point. Deflect, attack the poster, refuse to address the issues presented in the blog.

It is funny how none of you has the balls to actually address the issues in the blog, instead attacking me.

Try growing a pair.


Maybe because whatever "issues" your blog is allegedly focusing on are presented in an incoherent ranting style, full of personal attacks and creepy "outing" rather than anything resembling a logically organized argument for whatever position you are trying to put forward? I still have no idea what actual position you're proposing other than "That user is a jerk".

----------------
Now playing: Joshua Kadison - Jessie
via FoxyTunes
Milton Roe
QUOTE(SelfHater @ Sun 21st December 2008, 6:32am) *

QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Sun 21st December 2008, 12:12pm) *

Something tells me that somewhere in our many-named friend's Wikipedia history, the phrase "I have deleted your article on your band/employer/self, ~~~~ Gwen Gale" appears. I can't think where I get that impression.


Im sure there's a tale behind the obsession with her being a lesbian feminist.

But is she a good-looking lesbian feminist? confused.gif

I thought the issue was that this Wyss person had been banned, and is thought to be editing (perhaps competently) as an admin Gwen Gale. If true, that's a problem, as when you're banned, you're banned. It's the person who is banned, not the account, as many decissions have made clear. Did I miss something?

There is a hole in the block policy which we've discussed, which is that an indef block which nobody is willing to overturn is considered a "community ban" only by virtue of the fact that nobody has been gutsy enough to overturn it. It's not the same as a ban-ban, which is pronouced like an excommunication by Jimbo or ArbCom. In theory, if somebody had been indef-blocked under one name came back under another and was not noticed, indeed even made it up to admin status, that would NOT be a "community ban" because clearly the community would be seen to be perfectly willing to let the person edit under the new name, showing that the problem with behavior did not translate over the change, and thus ipso facto no longer existed. Yes, this is block evasion to change names and start over, but on the other hand, if nobody notices for a long time, or notices for reasons which have nothing to do with behavior, does that not constitute evidence that a "community ban" is no longer in effect?

Eva Destruction
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sun 21st December 2008, 4:29pm) *

I thought the issue was that this Wyss person had been banned, and is thought to be editing (perhaps competently) as an admin Gwen Gale. If true, that's a problem, as when you're banned, you're banned.

Not really; basically, the Wyss account was banned from making any edit related to a person's alleged homosexuality or bisexuality (arbcom here); killed the old account and started a new account as Gwen Gale; Thatcher then spotted this alleged piece of "outing" (which I don't think WP's harshest critic would treat as a serious BLP violation) and assorted other issues (documented in insane detail here). She was also alleged (with no evidence that I can see) to be an admin at Wikitruth.
Milton Roe
QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Sun 21st December 2008, 9:45am) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sun 21st December 2008, 4:29pm) *

I thought the issue was that this Wyss person had been banned, and is thought to be editing (perhaps competently) as an admin Gwen Gale. If true, that's a problem, as when you're banned, you're banned.

Not really; basically, the Wyss account was banned from making any edit related to a person's alleged homosexuality or bisexuality (arbcom here); killed the old account and started a new account as Gwen Gale; Thatcher then spotted this alleged piece of "outing" (which I don't think WP's harshest critic would treat as a serious BLP violation) and assorted other issues (documented in insane detail here). She was also alleged (with no evidence that I can see) to be an admin at Wikitruth.

Bizarre. Gwen Gale says Chris Rock says Peppermint Patty is a lesbian. (And all this time, I thought she was just a closet smoker.) That would hinge on whether or not a Peanuts character is a person?? But on the other hand, the rest of the ban (which has no time limit) would apply to any discussion of homosexuality whatsoever (including the spelling of "gay") so it's pretty draconian, and might apply to a comic strip. The Wyss probation is for disruption and has a one year timeframe, but the topic ban does not.

QUOTE(ArbCom decision Nov 2005)
1) Ted Wilkes and Wyss are banned from making any edit related to a person's alleged homosexuality or bisexuality. The clauses "any edit" and "related to homosexuality or bisexuality" shall be interpreted broadly; this remedy is intended, for example, to prohibit correcting the spelling of "gay".
HappyWanderer
For Gwen Gale to do what she did, to deceptively create another account, get admin status by climbing a social ladder, and then warn people about "conflict of interest" when she created her own vanity article and got people to try and hide the evidence or justify it somehow, is wrong and hypocritical.

I don't think this serves as an example of "admin abuse", as it was not abuse of administrative functions, but abuse of Wikipedia by an administrator. Then again, Wikipedia itself is abusive.

On the other hand, the reason for what this anonymous person is doing is probably Gwen Gale's deletion of their precious vanity article, and I don't think the intent of the person is very benign after all, considering that he creates accounts that are anagrams of "you are such a cunt".

Whilst it is an unethical thing to create a sockpuppet and climb up the ranks to become a high-profile Wikipedia administrator, when previously you created vanity pages and promoted yourself, and this does need to be documented, it is also unscrupulous for this person to create five accounts on this forum and create blogs for the sole purpose of writing about Ms. Wyss.

This could be done in a more constructive fashion.
Eva Destruction
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sun 21st December 2008, 4:56pm) *

Bizarre. Gwen Gale says Chris Rock says Peppermint Patty is a lesbian. (And all this time, I thought she was just a closet smoker.) The whole thing hinges on whether or not a Peanuts character is a person??

Results 1 - 10 of about 14,000 for "peppermint patty" lesbian. Maybe there's something to it. She also made the shocking revelation that There is no evidence [Elvis] was gay.

Of the diffs cited in the ANI thread linked above, if you check the dates virtually all are from before the Arbcom ruling, in any case.
jd turk
QUOTE(codswallop @ Sun 21st December 2008, 9:30am) *

It is funny how none of you has the balls to actually address the issues in the blog, instead attacking me.

Try growing a pair.


I have a pair, thanks for asking, but that's probably because I'm not some anonymous person who's obsessed with a woman you've never met, and how she wronged you, or your band, or your place of business, or whatever. Next time instead of spending hours writing a hard-to-read, who-gives-a-crap blog, why don't you just set your accusations and spite to a musical beat and record a song for us to ignore?

Or perhaps a haiku?

Gwen Gale is Wyss!
And Swiss! And a lesbian!
So she won't date me...


I glanced at your blog, realized it's the same things you've said here several times before in other threads that became quickly ignored. You didn't listen to what people said then, I'm not going to bother to repeat them.

You know, much like you (and quite a few other folks here at WR), I had trouble at WP and was blocked, too. I didn't set out to expose the massive injustices and larcenous behaviors of an individual admin. I realized it's a flawed system, and not worth my time. Look at the forums here. There's lots of people complaining about the actions of admins who've done a lot worse than deleting a page on your garage band.
Anonymous editor
This individual who has created all these accounts needs to seek help. Such an obsession with another individual is unhealthy.
Eva Destruction
I like the bit about "the hippocratic nature of her remarks", though. Conjures up an image that probably isn't what you intended. The replying-to-yourself is a nice touch, too.
Alison
QUOTE(codswallop @ Sat 20th December 2008, 9:02pm) *

Should arbcom, other admins, and people that know better allow this kind of abuse to continue for years? Why do so many admins, including some people here in this forum, defend this type of thing?

If this person doesn't deserve a permanent and indefinite block, who does?

http://gwengalerevealed.blogspot.com

Let the spin, deflection away from the issue, and stomping of feet begin.

... and how about you not use open proxies to anonymously spam your blog to various userpages on Wikipedia angry.gif That's pretty cowardly all round, and more that a little freaky.
One
QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Sun 21st December 2008, 3:44pm) *

"admin creates a page on herself but doesn't protest when someone else decides it's non-notable"

This pithy description pretty much puts it into perspective. It's hard to imagine a universe where this could be called "abuse."
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.