Wikipedia's war against journalism

Because no one else is doing it--not even the media.
User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4547
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1099 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Re: Wikipedia's war against journalism

Post by ericbarbour » Sun Nov 04, 2018 8:34 pm

Once again I will post something from the book wiki, because evidently someone has forgotten who Fiona "Panyd" Apps is:
Richard Symonds: Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry - a completely miserable "right prat", loser, and manipulator. Went from college student to grunt-hood in the Royal Navy to unemployment and squatting in an empty flat to "Office and Development Manager" of Wikimedia UK with remarkable speed...........

His girlfriend Panyd was accused of being a sockpuppet[13], partly due to Symonds' pathetic attempts to cover up her identity, and partly due to her schizophrenia.[14] Apparently they got married shortly after he became a paid employee of Wikimedia UK. Her first RFA in January 2010, nominated by Symonds (of course!), was strangled by Thomas Fischer, who posted a simple comment:

"Sorry, but your userpage says that you have Schizotypal personality disorder, which according to its Wikipedia article may manifest as "inappropriate or constricted affect (the individual appears cold and aloof); behaviour or appearance that is odd, eccentric, or peculiar; poor rapport with others and a tendency to social withdrawal" and so forth. These are not characteristics that administrators should exhibit, and I'd rather not run the risk that they may appear in the future even if they have not so far. Sandstein 21:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)"

Panyd's second RFA in November 2010 was nominated by Jonathan Cardy and Oliver Keyes and a rousing success -- partly because Fischer and other critics were shouted down and forced to change their votes. She claimed to have started editing Wikipedia in 2007 yet nearly all the records of her 2007 edits have mysteriously vanished from the database. The only edits prior to November 2008 are these:

02:52, 14 October 2007 (diff | hist) . . (+13)‎ . . Churchfitters ‎
01:16, 13 October 2007 (diff | hist) . . (+40)‎ . . N User:Panyd/monobook.js ‎ (←Created page with 'importScript('User:AzaToth/twinkle.js');')

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ry/Archive

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Wikipedia's war against journalism

Post by CrowsNest » Mon Nov 05, 2018 12:09 am

I'm not sure I agree that the reason investigative journalists don't cover Wikipedia because they are scared. I suppose they use it, but I can't see how that stops them reporting on it either. I'm thinking they would take the view that their stories would improve Wikipedia, at least the first few, when they finally realise there is no improving it. At least with stories on Wikipedia, you can do all your investigations from your desk.

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Wikipedia's war against journalism

Post by CrowsNest » Tue Nov 20, 2018 2:55 am

Worth noting here that Wikipedia Administrator Dennis Brown and the Trump White House seem to be in agreement - journalists don't have a First Amendment right to ask questions inside their establishments.

In real life, this attack on the press was overturned by a judge, the White House being compeled to draw up non arbitrary rules governing access. On Wikipedia, not so much.

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Wikipedia's war against journalism

Post by CrowsNest » Sun Jan 06, 2019 5:09 am

:lol:
Contact from a mag
I received a Wiki email from a well known online magazine today asking for an interview related to editing a highly active AP2-related article. I demurred as didn’t find it appropriate. It appears that the author has contacted several other editors. No idea what policy is – but thought I’d mention it on a heavily traveled page. O3000 (talk) 01:57, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Hmm exciting. I hope you're flattered! But maybe that Village People Page is better traveled? I don't know that we have any policy; as a matter of fact, I hope we don't. When I was on ArbCom things were different, but now I can speak for myself and I suppose you can do so too. As far as I know you're an editor in fine, fine standing, and I certainly wouldn't want to tell you that your comments would be inappropriate; I'd welcome them. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 02:04, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
Well, isn't it a shame that the Wikipedians at the "Village Page" declined the opportunity to clarify what the policy is, when the opportunity presented itself, arising from a situation not likely to be much different from this one. A journalist has spotted dodgy things going on, and wants to interview the parties involved, to either get them to speak on the record as to how Wikipedia really works, or to get them to say something which contradicts how the reporter observed them actually acting, either passively or as the result of a sting operation.

I wonder how we are meant to read the comment regarding standing. Do we assume this means editors not in good standing, are not to speak to members of the press? Ordinarily you would hope not, but then you read this thread and you really have to wonder just how many Wikipedians would sign off on a policy that said that. The practical use of such being as an easy way to decline ban appeals, or escalate editing restrictions into full bans.

User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Wikipedia's war against journalism

Post by Graaf Statler » Sun Jan 06, 2019 11:50 am

Beste MoiraMoira,

Zou je mij een e-mailadres of telefoonnummer kunnen sturen. Ik zoek contact ivm mijn verslaggeverscolumn in De Volkskrant. Overigens verschijnt daar geen letter zonder je instemming, dus geen zorg. Ik ben bereikbaar via m.oostveen -at- volkskrant.nl

Met vriendelijke groet,

Margriet Oostveen

Beste Margriet,
Zoals je op deze pagina ook kan lezen is MoiraMoira al enige tijd niet meer actief hier op Wikipedia. Ik ben bang dat zij dus ook geen contact op zal nemen, maar ik blijf hopen dat zij weer terug zal keren. Dqfn13 (overleg) 2 jan 2019 13:54 (CET)


Source

Question of a journalist of "De Volkskrant" to Drmies his evil sister MoiraMoira.

Wikipedians don't talk with the press, they never will. Because it is a sekt. Or better, the system behaves itself as a sekt, it makes people to sekt members. People lose there ability to think in a normal and reasonable way, they get programmed.
And I myself would never accept such invitations for many reasons. If a journalist wants to know something he or she is welcome here, in public, so everybody can read the questions and the answers. And everybody can give his or here opinion and no one can twist my words later, what so often happens in the sekt wikipedia. That is fair and this is not, Margriet. You never get a neutral story in this way, you will hear only the gaslighting story because that has become the reality for them. And one advice for free, do your one research . Document and substantiate always your claims like Eric, Crow, me and others do, that is the only way to find the true behind wikipedia. Own research, not what someone is saying or claiming, Margriet.

Wikipedians are cowards, hidden behind there keyboards behaving themself like little fascists. They can't stand the light, even if you promise to be discrete. A real journalist invest her or himself, like Steln does here and the others too madam. They search for the lighten thinks and the plain true, and not in the dark sewers of WP to talk with the trolls themself in secret.

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Wikipedia's war against journalism

Post by CrowsNest » Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:13 pm

Meant to post this here, but relevant to both threads really....

https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/vie ... 8551#p8551

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Wikipedia's war against journalism

Post by CrowsNest » Thu Mar 28, 2019 10:25 am

To quote myself.....
https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/vie ... 8836#p8836
Everything about this case show why investigative reporters should not only be keeping their credentials to themselves while developing stories, they should do so while reaching out for comment before publishing. I would even go so far as to say it shows why even publishing your findings under a pseudonym, and letting your editor field comments, is a perfectly justifiable approach to journalists writing about Wikipedia.

Post Reply