Didn't anyone notice this?
SchuminWeb (T-C-L-K-R-D) , who has apparently held a grudge against OMM writer Erik Wolpaw,
somehow managed to get the Wikipedia article about OMM (an old gaming site) deleted.

Schumin tried before in January.
The only vote I can see is from MelanieN (T-C-L-K-R-D) . Girlfriend? Sock?

Among the results:

Boing Boing had considerable coverage of it. Note some of the comments:
Oops! Neckbeards, ha ha.

And here it is on Slashdot. Result: similar comments.
I've seen a lot of buzz about this on gaming forums.

Mr. Schumin is quite the classic Wikipedia admin-troll. Look at the vote in his 2007 RFA.
Now look at the vote when he first tried in 2006.
There are numerous complaints about him in AN/I and Wikiquette.
And btw, he cooperates with Cirt when Scientology articles come up.....

No surprise there.

I wasn't commenting on his appearance so much as the reason he gives for "not wearing a mask" on the file description.

I was wondering what was taking you guys so long to make a topic on this.

The good thing is, we were able to reverse Schumin's blatant COI pushing.

The bridge collapsed ... good thing is, we kept the plans and were able to rebuild a copy!

Dude, are you just going to be following me around and insulting me whenever you get the chance?

And to extend on your metaphor, we were able to improve upon the design of the bridge and build a better one because of it.

Your naive apologetics are vastly more insulting. Can't take the heat, get the fuck out of the kitchen.



Naive twat: you have improved _nothing_.

Y'know, taiwanwatchfob, there's being critical of a person's efforts, and then there's just name-calling. You're being tiresomely disagreeable.

It just feels silly to even have to argue that there are clear improvements from this version when it was userfied after the AfD to the current version.

And it is certainly similar to, but way better than the old version.

I don't really get the big deal of the "COI" complaint angle. If he'd just up and blown it away via fiat, sure, that'd be a prob. But just initiating a deletion discussion? No, you still need to convince others of the merits of the deletion. The whys, hows, and whos of who started an AfD rarely come in to play.

I don't wanna cross-pollute topics too much here, but the Wikipe-tan nominator was just blocked as some sock today, but the debate still goes on, validly.

Silver seren is not a naive apologist, another piece of wiki-trash washed up on the shores of Wikipedia Review? Good grief.

In any case, in consideration of the source of these remarks, I'll back off.

Oops. One moment. Another bit of nonsense to be corrected from the man...

(Not even going to bother.)

@Tarc: Well, I think the main issue is that the COI (or sock-blocking) kinda taints the AfD discussion and is likely to bog it down into discussions of such.

When the Tacoma Narrows bridge collapsed in 1940, there was a careful examination towards cause. The film taken of the event -- youtube it -- still sends shivers down the spine of any engineer worthy of the title. Ever since, new designs are very carefully checked to make sure they were not subject to the same design flaw.

Seems to have worked so far: probably hundreds of new bridges since, and none have collapsed in the same way.

Funny how engineering works, eh?

Now, if you really think your pasting more lipstick onto the pig are in any way "design improvements" in the same vein, you are beyond hope.

If these two piddlers are going to continue, can it go into the WP Annexe?

TW was so busy bitching out Seren, that neither one of them noted something important:

The news coverage of this (the Boing Boing and Slashdot articles) were followed with a considerable
number of comments. Comments that, for the first time I can recall, attacked Wikipedia's internal
culture for corruption and insanity.

And there was (some) coverage of this on gaming blogs/forums. For example:
RockPaperShotgun
Caltrops (complete with the comment aimed at Schumin: "You fucked with the wrong website, you disgustingly obese nobody. ")
Penny Arcade

The gamer natives are restless, Seren. This little episode, despite a "favorable" result to inclusionists,
has garnered a lot of the wrong kind of attention among gamers.

And if you ever need proof that Wikipedia's admin forces contain some amazingly pathetic specimens......
look at Schumin's website. It's been up since 1996, and it looks as if he hasn't improved it since 1996.

Interesting: this. And this, and this and this.
He spends a LOT of time on his journal ranting about his activities, protesting the CoS.

Personally I'm fine with that, I dislike the CoS as much as anyone. But seriously, if I were a member of
Anonymous, I'd be embarrassed to have a clod like Ben Schumin in the group.

Plus, he's one of the few signatories to Neutrality in Scientology.
He's been sneakily messing with articles like Jenna Miscavige Hill and other CoS-related items.

Read his edit history. People made him an admin based on his fooling people that he was an "inclusionist".
Yet his edits show the term "(rm unsourced trivia)" over and over and over again.

I won't go into details, but *coughs* Anonymous is embarrassed that he's a member.

I think the main point that people need to understand though is that anyone can put something up for deletion. And a number of people have all agreed, evidenced by the deletion review discussion, that the closing admin was dead wrong in his decision. The actions of those two, Schumin especially, are not representative of Wikipedia. It would be different if OMM stayed deleted, but it didn't, the decision was reversed.

And, as at least some of the people in those discussion are pointing out, the Rock, Paper, Shotgun one especially, it would be helpful if news website actually covered these things if they are notable and important. The fact that there is not that much about Old Man Murray (though more stuff now thanks to this incident) is not the fault of Wikipedia, but the gaming news industry itself.


Edit: What am I supposed to be seeing here? He didn't really add any content, he just rearranged some sentences and moved the references that were in a list at the bottom of the page in as inline references.

It's probably better than keeping around unsourced trivia. Wikipedia has enough "inclusionism" for fanboy material already, especially comics and anime.

Perhaps I should comment on something else.

Schumin spends quite a bit of time sneakily watching/manicuring articles about people and things related to Erik Wolpaw and oldmanmurray.com.

For example, the game Wolpaw is famous for helping write: Portal.
Plus Wolpaw associates, such as Marc Laidlaw and K. Thor Jensen.
Plus Portal Of Evil, which he had already killed (after which it was redirected to a user's version).
Might have something to do with PoE's users mocking him?

Isn't it interesting that Wolpaw's partner in OMM and at Valve, Chet Faliszek, doesn't have a Wikipedia BLP?
As one of the primary authors of both Portal and the Left 4 Dead franchise, I'd think Chet was "notable". Google him if you don't believe me.

I wonder if Schumin's thinking about deleting the Laidlaw, Portal and Left 4 Dead articles, also.

Ben Schumin is a very smug "little" man, and keeping him in the Wikipedia admin ranks is a really, really bad idea, okay?

Sadly, I don't think there's anything I can do about him personally.

And, geez, stop giving me work to do, you guys! Now I have to add Chet to my list of articles to make.

Better question: is Silver seren's purpose to convert every thread into a WP Annex candidate?

It's all about the taint, isn't it?

@Kohser: With me? Of course.

Why? Don't you love Seren, your fellow Wiki-luv-boy?


This is why I post the really nasty stuff in the "seekrit" forum......so he won't be able to act on it.
The Ben Schumin thing is trivial bullshit, though it does demonstrate the profound corruption of WP's normal operations.
He plays politics very well, the only people who complain about him are minor editors or vandals.

By the way, did any of you guy read this Rock, Paper, Shotgun article?

It says "If you saw Wednesday’s article about Old Man Murray’s temporary deletion from Wikipedia, you’ll know that it was originally deemed “not notable” due to a lack of references. That’s been fixed now, thanks to the very hard work of Wikipedia editors. (It’s probably wise not to dismiss one of the greatest works of humanity over a single, dodgy admin settling personal grudges. Compare and contrast with when we turned our attention to Fox News. Nothing changed. Wikipedia addresses the issue professionally within 24 hours.) And we want to help it stay that way."

So...Rock, Paper, Shotgun thinks Wikipedia is worthwhile.

While always fallacious, appeals to authority are marginally less offensive when there is an actual authority involved.

It was more in response to what Eric said before about a previous article that Rock, Paper, Shotgun put out that was negative toward Wikipedia (before the deletion review reversed the deletion).

That's not quite what they said though, is it? They said it's "one of the greatest works of humanity." You could say the same thing about, say, nuclear weapons, totalitarianism, or the Jimmy Buffett discography.

Nobody is denying that Wikipedia is impressively big, has lots of stuff going on with it all the time, and is viewed by lots and lots of people. We're simply pointing out that those are not necessarily good things.

*sings off-key, waving a salt-encrusted glass*
"Your time is... wasted again in Wikipediaville..."

Indeed. But having said what I said above, I should also hasten to point out that my own sympathies are mostly with Mr. Schumin in this instance. It appears to be true that he's pathetic, but that could be said of lots of people, including myself (depending on what day of the week it is).

Anyway, simply put, his reaction to a long-running series of personal insults from the Old Man Murray forums (whether or not they were justified) was to try to get information about the offending parties deleted from the internet. It would be completely hypocritical for me to suggest that this sort of reaction is inherently wrong, since after all, my own reaction to a comparatively short series of insults from a small number of Wikipedians was, at least initially, to call for Wikipedia to be deleted from the internet.

Of course, the difference is that I knew that even with dogged persistence and a non-negligible amount of behind-the-scenes influence, I had (and still have) no real chance of success, despite how much better off the world would be if I succeeded. Whereas Mr. Schumin, with a much smaller (and now increasingly moribund) target, came very close to succeeding in this instance - and given that the world would barely notice either way, there's no real guarantee that he won't have better luck next time.

And if you'll indulge me just a wee bit further, this incident could actually be very ominous for Wikipedia as a whole, despite how trivial it seems. Gamers have always been one of Wikipedia's core constituencies, and that hasn't changed since the early days of the site's existence. Time and again, we've seen how websites suffer when they get a little too full of themselves and start doing things that alienate one or more of their core constituencies. It's like when you ban people - they don't simply go away; they get pissed off, start bad-mouthing you in public, plot revenge, launch competitors, and so on. But unlike banning people, which usually only produces one or two pissed-off people at a time, alienating gamers would create a vast group of organized, technically-adept, highly motivated, and in many cases extremely clever individuals lined up against WP and its administrators.

So as I often do, I'd have to agree with Mr. Barbour - keeping Mr. Schumin in the Wikipedia admin ranks is a really, really bad idea, at least for Wikipedia. Of course, that's exactly why they'll keep him; they're all big fans of the Really Bad Idea.

Thank you. Now, how to change Seren's mind.

First you'll have to find it.

But in the case of alienating gamers, what's bad for Wikipedia is explicitly GOOD for Wikia. Long ago Jimbo Wales set up WP rules in such a way as to encourage gaming and 'cruft crap to go to someplace where he personally could make AdSense money from it. By now, the habit is so ingrained that not even people who own no Wikia shares question it. It's not as though Wikia is publically traded-- most people who help Jimbo by sweeping 'cruft off WP hardly know what they're doing. They haven't thought about it. Since WP is NOTPAPER, they really have no reason except a vague notion of habit.

I've sometimes thought that a lot of clarification of WP:NOT could be done, if it were simply rewritten as WP:NOTWIKIA, explaining all this in terms that even a Neckbeard (thanks for that) might understand.

After all, can you think of any reason except ethical and financial reasons, why WP should NOT be anything you can think of, that is hyperlinkable? I can't. And there's no sign at all that the people who own Wikia have any ethics. From BLP we can see that WP doesn't.

Hmmmmmmm.

Why am I not surprised?

Yet another Slashdot post about the OMM business.

This time, the squabble has moved to the Signpost. Also.
Yes, that tie-dyed blimp Schumin is still up to no good. Why hasn't anyone RFCed him?

Look at the talkpage archives. There's only one, from 2006-2007.
Yet there was a very long argument on there back around March 4, when the AFD battle was ongoing.
I suspect some admin has been erasing and oversighting the talkpage. Something suspicious.

Also being proposed as a subject for the Signpost. Twenty bucks sez it'll never be mentioned again.

And now, "meatpuppet" is an insult.. Do tell.

What a strange, strange person... This is one of those guys who basically documents his whole life on the web, with his own highly extensive Youtube channel, a large personal website that appears to be devoted to total, utter banality, and videos like this that go on for 20 minutes about literally nothing whatsoever:



No sane person could watch this for more than 90 seconds, and even an insane person would be hard-pressed to get past 3 minutes.

This guy is clearly a full-blown narcissist, and probably OCD too, though he appears mostly harmless - I doubt he's a sociopath or some other sort of weirdo. He does seem to have an almost completely infantile mentality. It's good to know that he can hold down a job, and doesn't seem to have any serious medical problems, other than being overweight.

FWIW, I hate to say things like this about people I've never met in person, but when there's this much documentary evidence it's hard not to reach those conclusions. I mean, it was obvious enough with people like Phil Sandifer and Shankers, and they weren't even video-bloggers. I can see now why the Old Man Murphy forum users reacted to Schumin the way they did, and frankly, his insistence on trying to get that article deleted is dangerously close to Streisand Effect territory for him, if it isn't already there.

Again, I'm not going to say that what he's doing is wrong - after all, if I were a Wikipedian myself, I'd probably be voting "Delete" in every AfD I could get my hands on. But if he really wants that deletion to happen, he'd better come up with a few "meat puppets" of his own, ASAP.

I made it through 16 seconds, but that was with the audio turned off.

So I must be sane after all …

Jon

Who would have guessed?

The thing is, about 75 seconds in, he turns on this really loud fire-drill sound effect, and if you've still got the audio on at that point, there's no way you're going to want to keep it on for another 2 seconds, much less another 20 minutes. I mean, how can anyone do this? It's mind-boggling, it really is.

This is why I can't stand listening to gay-ish male voices for very long.

True, it can be trying... but I should just point out here that I've met several gay folks over the years, and very few of them showed any real tendency towards narcissism or self-absorption whatsoever. For some reason, effeminacy can give people (men, usually, but sometimes women too) the wrong impression, as if the person is trying to get attention or put on some sort of exhibitionist "show" for people, when in fact that's not usually what it is at all. It may be that some gay guys who are effeminate are trying to compensate for deep-seated insecurities in some way, but that's certainly not the same thing, and of course that can also be said of a lot of people regardless of what sort of things they do in private.

Long story short, I don't believe Mr. Schumin's behavior as a Wikipedian has much of anything to do with whatever his sexual proclivities may be, assuming he even has any. This is simply a guy who can't accept the kind of effect he has on people whom he either doesn't agree with or doesn't respect. If he is gay (and I don't really know if he is or not), he might have cause to believe that some of the enmity directed at him is bigotry - but I don't think there's any question that there would still be plenty of enmity even if he looked and talked like Brad Pitt, or George Clooney, or someone even better-looking, such as myself.

Try this. I can listen to this multiple times a day.

Jesus, talk about being separated at birth.

Bringing this thread up for 2 reasons:

First, Seren created a small BLP about Chet Faliszek.

Second, I have a video which will make you wonder about the sanity of people who make video games.

Behold: The nerds of Valve, talking about the company's "awesome" snack bar.

Complete with Erik Wolpaw complaining about people stealing his butter.

Too many idiots worship these guys. They are starting to believe their
own press releases. A pile of junk food does not make a good workplace.
And Wolpaw bears a frightening resemblance to Sheldon on
The Big Bang Theory.

This is just a bump to say that Schumin recently retired from Wikipedia. After his several flagrant abuses of power, I can't say that I'll miss him, but it's too bad he couldn't have stuck around long enough to go through what would've been a very lulzy arbitration.

No bloody backbone, so he ran. But will he be back under another name?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=529472366:



If he returns, he'll either have to go through Arbitration in order to remain a sysop or resign his sysop tools in order to avoid Arbitration. If he doesn't return within three months, he'll be desysopped.

Yes, sounds ruddy fine in theory. But there's nothing to stop him socking and becoming an admin again, is there?

You mean "Yes, it sounds very fine in theory, but there is nothing to stop him from socking and becoming an admin once more" right?

Otherwise, you butchered everything. Even your use of "ruddy" was wrong. Ruddy means "damned" and not "damn." A real Brit would know this.

Look, we all know you're ruddy illiterate. Why do you keep proving it again and again?