View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Wed Oct 23, 2019 3:10 am




Reply to topic  [ 105 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 11  Next
Wikipediocrats not understanding how Wikipedia works 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 4187
Reply with quote
Kww wrote:
To this day, I don't understand how anyone could argue that I was going to get the WMF in trouble by increasing the protection on an article.
Not that it wasn't obvious before, but the Turkey block and German Court defeat has only rammed home the fact that if the WMF can't credibly claim that correction of Wikipedia articles is a plausible first avenue of response to what readers or even casual editors can claim is illegal content in their own jurisdiction, if every single complaint has to be passed through a network of guardians and gatekeepers who are not by any stretch of the imagination representatives of the WMF, shit gets real for them pretty fast.

Wikipedians should thank their lucky stars that the WMF will seemingly not throw editors to the wolves even when they are legally responsible for performing an Administrative action they knew went against the wishes of the WMF's representative in the muck, even if by some lame sense of IAR they thought it would not. IAR does not excuse rank stupidity, at least not in theory.


Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:53 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 4187
Reply with quote
Poetlister wrote:
Oh yes, who cares if it's less reliable than Wikipedia, as long as it looks pretty?
Style over substance could literally be Wikipedia's motto, you fucknut.

These are the headlines......

* Wikipedia's "substance" is exceedingly thin, less than 0.5% are Featured articles, and only 10% of articles have more than five inline references ("reference" being broadly construed!)

* Wikipedia's obsession with image has got so bad that they are literally picking and choosing whether to write about sportswomen or other species of women, based on what will make the magic gender gap percentage reduce faster.

* Jess Wade has managed to fool your idiot of a webmaster into thinking she is a competent Wikipedian, just by figuring out how to work the VE citation function and slapping a bracketed number at the end of every sentence (her campaign of sloppy edits driven by her haste in closing that gap!).

* "Less reliable than Wikipedia" ignores the fact Wikipedia is unreliable by design. Only a fool trusts a single word on the site, as they admit in their own disclaimer. Luckily for them, the world is full of fools.


Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:46 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:22 pm
Posts: 251
Reply with quote
IF readers know that an unsourced claim in Wikipedia is junk.
IF readers know to actually read the sources instead of trusting what the text says is confirmed by them.
IF readers realize that their reading of a source can be biased by the expectation created by the citation.
IF readers realize that sources may have been cherry-picked to support a particular point of view.
IF readers can recognize synthesis and opinion as distinct from fact
THEN Wikipedia might be kinda, sorta reliable.

IF the Wikipedia community realized that expert advice is needed to understand some subjects
AND IF experts were welcomed as advisors (but possibly with a conflict of interest, but therefore to be protected from hostile attack)
THEN Wikipedia could, in theory, become more reliable than traditional encyclopedias.

IF the academic freedom of Wikiversity and its method of creating neutrality-by-inclusion (far more like a university than an encyclopedia) had been protected and preserved
AND IF the use of sister-wiki links on Wikiversity on Wikipedia articles had been allowed instead of immediately being removed
THEN the wiki collection, Wikipedia plus Wikiversity, could have become a fantastic place to research a topic in depth. (My sense is that eventually this would rebound back to Wikipedia with better articles resulting, and, again, my sense is that fear of that outcome was exactly why Wikiversity was attacked.)

HOWEVER, hardly anyone cared when Wikiversity was attacked. The fascists prevailed, at least for a time. Heh! Lomax v. WMF might have an effect. Or not. But we do what we can do, no excuses.


Fri Jun 21, 2019 7:58 am
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 4187
Reply with quote
The_Adversary wrote:
I think until people who run antivandal bots and manage certain specialized utilities go on strike, the Foundation won’t care.
Looking at the Citationbot debacle, the Wikipediots seem to have been sabotaging their bots just fine before FramBan. Rather than not caring, maybe the WMF just won't notice the specific reason for the latest fire in the dumpster?


Sat Jun 22, 2019 3:32 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 3516
Reply with quote
Well, bot debacles is there specialty, and they are of course great troll toys. Just fuck the bots with corrupt data and get what you want. Even a SanFanBan.

Why do you think I got all that mails with links to click on to strange sites and to wikipedia trolling from WP users and why do you think I block them and say get lost? And mails with all kind of backed in answers? Just to sabotage the bots. What is my new forum friend from the other side still doing? Fucking the shitty bots.
First Bart tried it and and was almost begging if I wanted to sock, and now he try it in this way. But I don't react anymore and don'y motion his name anymore and block anything I don't like. Because those bots need constant feed. And if you don't feet them they die.
O, and I have noting to do with new accounts what should be mine on WP, I just read it on Discord, I don't click on links, nothing to do with it.

_________________
Mijn blog. (In Dutch) of kom eens gezellig bij de Kolonel langs in Eerbeek.
En kijk eens hier, het "Verboden" lijstje van door mij aangemaakte artiklen.

. Image
.Winner of
The SanBan


Sat Jun 22, 2019 4:23 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 4187
Reply with quote
Anroth wrote:
14 year old blonde girls do not spend their time editing Wikipedia.
Um, yes they do. Some are even Administrators. What kind of a fuckwit racks up nearly 10,000 edits over 7 years, most of those to the back-office, and doesn't know that?

Most if not all of them hide their age and gender because, well, y'know, Wikipedia has issues with predators and misogynists and assholes and a general all round public misconception that the people behind the greatest website ever created wouldn't be so stupid as to let children compile, curate and indeed protect an "encyclopedia", not even one "anyone can edit".

But they do. Just one of the many things Wikipedians and their cult brought to an unsuspecting world. They need a real good kicking for that. Not the children you understand, what with them being innocent victims of a highly addictive website that gives them a false sense of self esteem and belonging and maturity, all things I am led to believe are desired by 14 year old girls. At least the less outgoing bookish ones.

The crushing reality of what Wikipedia is, eventually makes these young girls cry, or worse. And their parents, who had no idea they were an Administrator of the site, are understandably upset, but the girls don't tell their parents, because they know there is nothing they can do about it. That should be your goddamned slogan, you evil bastards.

Wikipedia analysis. Done well, it usually requires, y'know, KNOWING STUFF ABOUT WIKIPEDIA. You fucking retard. Now GO DO YOUR HOMEWORK! I don't care if you have to report a vandal, I said GO, Young Lady!


Sun Jun 23, 2019 10:03 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 4187
Reply with quote
Ming_the_mong wrote:
this is one of those times when Fram loses points with Ming for not walking away from the argument.
When did Fram ever walk away from an argument? If was so rare, he would announce it to everyone, like it was some big thing, and not a basic fucking competency of a Wikipedia Administrator.
Ming_the_mong wrote:
Fram's biggest problem in all of this is the weakness that he tends to slide very quickly from not suffering fools gladly to not suffering them at all.
For a Wikipedia Administrator, both are weaknesses.


Fri Jun 28, 2019 12:27 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 4187
Reply with quote
Reminder for the pseudo-lawyer retards. Email communications are presumed confidential. Giving permission to publish them on Wikipedia is not only a release from confidentiality, it is a release under CC-BY. Revocation of the former is a dick move and likely unenforceable unless shown to be accidental, revocation of the latter is an impossibility.

Fair use is irrelevant, it does not override a permission if that permission is not a copyright. The permission it would be over-riding here is a confidentiality, and therefore you are not engaged in a fair use argument, but a public interest argument. Fairness then applies, and anyone claiming freedom of the press obviously has a better case.

And the most important thing - someone demonstrating their own misunderstanding of their rights, doesn't invalidate those rights. Double-dick move, that. Very common among Wikipedians, lacking moral character as they do.


Fri Jul 05, 2019 2:45 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 4187
Reply with quote
Quote:
A good encyclopedia should be pleased to have him editing.

People who view Wikipedia as a role-playing game or social-media site need not appreciate Eric's virtues.
Pro-tip: when Eric Corbett has seemingly been abandoned by 99.999% of Wikipedia editors, maybe rethink your supposed explanations for why his services are not being fought for by the community.

I mean, they've never really been true, his detractors have always included heavyweight people considered 'proper' editors from day one, but come on, you just look like proper fucking idiots now. People who seem to be influenced far more by friendships than observable fact or sound logic.

People who probably considered Wikipedia to be a social network more than anyone else just getting on with the task at hand. The people who always found it so easy to abandon the mission when their unique personal experience of it was not to their liking. Precious little fucks.

The toxics are named that for a reason, they poison everything around them, even their own support base eventually. You were told. You didn't listen. You are morons. Into the sea with you all.

HTD.


Sat Jul 06, 2019 1:10 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 3516
Reply with quote
CrowsNest wrote:
The toxics are named that for a reason, they poison everything around them, even their own support base eventually. You were told. You didn't listen. You are morons. Into the sea with you all.
HTD.

Fixing the true. Sending me direct after the blunder Alexander SanFanBan a mail when can we expect your first sock. Sending mails with links to trolling on WP. Bart Legal on discord, please, please make a sock puppet to help me with my trolling. Vig with his gaslicht for weeks. A peeing lady in a toy train scenery out of the 80's constructed to a evidence of woman unfriendliness. Everything he has tried after Bart Legal begged him for help.

Poison, poison poison, deadly poison.

HTD is not necessary to mention Crow, they are themself so much better in Hasting The Day then we are. Because they built there one fire pill, they collect there own kindling wood, they collect jerrycans with petrol themself and where even so friendly to lighten the whole shit pile at the end.

Well, that is service, isn't it Crow? The HTD mouvment only has to sit and watch till they blow themself in the most effective way like they are doing now.

_________________
Mijn blog. (In Dutch) of kom eens gezellig bij de Kolonel langs in Eerbeek.
En kijk eens hier, het "Verboden" lijstje van door mij aangemaakte artiklen.

. Image
.Winner of
The SanBan


Sat Jul 06, 2019 4:35 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 105 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 11  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group ColorizeIt.
Designed by ST Software.