Squared.Circle.Boxing taken to ANI over "transphobia" concerns

[Bbb23sucks]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... hing_here?

[ericbarbour]

With Novem Linguae's third diff (linked directly here), I say an indefinite ban is in order for SCB. We got rid of Athaenara for her blatant transphobia, and we can keep doing that for other users until there are no more overt transphobes on the platform. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 07:03, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

That's the future of WP. Just like the past--but instead of pro-Israel fanatics and the likes of SlimVirgin, Will Beback, William Connolley, Guy Chapman etc. etc. pushing their personal POVs, it will fill up with trans "activists" who will be violently intolerant of anyone who disagrees with them. And they will have garbage admins to back their ragebanning up. No negotiation and no give-and-take, just destroy the enemy at all costs. "I'm against hatred BUT I HATE YOU". Classic.

[Ognistysztorm]

With Novem Linguae's third diff (linked directly here), I say an indefinite ban is in order for SCB. We got rid of Athaenara for her blatant transphobia, and we can keep doing that for other users until there are no more overt transphobes on the platform. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 07:03, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

That's the future of WP. Just like the past--but instead of pro-Israel fanatics and the likes of SlimVirgin, Will Beback, William Connolley, Guy Chapman etc. etc. pushing their personal POVs, it will fill up with trans "activists" who will be violently intolerant of anyone who disagrees with them. And they will have garbage admins to back their ragebanning up. No negotiation and no give-and-take, just destroy the enemy at all costs. "I'm against hatred BUT I HATE YOU". Classic.

The unfortunate side effect if Jenn's stories and the another scandal get put on major outlets or as content on high-follower X accounts (and then get reposted by Elon Musk), is that the trans and perhaps the queer movement as a whole gets tarred for it.

One solution is find some trans journos who got wronged by Wikipedia by some reason and give them the guts to put themselves as bylines to the stories.

[ericbarbour]

One solution is find some trans journos who got wronged by Wikipedia by some reason and give them the guts to put themselves as bylines to the stories.

One thing that co-authoring a book about Wikipedia history and trying to market it to book publishers is this: journalists in general tend to be lazy cowards. And love WP because they can use it to check facts. WP has ALREADY wronged some journalists, they have been publicly complaining about it, and very little has resulted.

Go and ask Sharyl Attkisson about Wikipedia. Just as a most-obvious example. She has been going off on how WP operates (or fails) for years. One of her many blog posts:
https://sharylattkisson.com/2019/01/the ... wikipedia/

Or you could ask the Register journalists who wrote uncomplementary (but TRUE) stories about WP's lunatic internal society. Some of them, and the Register itself, are being shat upon by WP, to this day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Register
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Orlowski (see the talkpage!)

And Cade Metz does not have a WP bio, and probably never will--because he ran items that made them look very bad, long ago.
For example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... t/Workshop

"based on the totality of the evidence presented" There is nothing there to substantiate a claim that my behavior was unacceptable: a substantial amount of smoke, but no fire. Hurting the project's credibility? According to The Regiter's Cade Metz, Wikipedia does not have credibility, it is a cult and it is run by a cabal. In short, Wikipedia is a cult. Or at least, the inner circle is a cult. We aren't the first to make this observation. On the inside, they reinforce each other's beliefs. And if anyone on the outside questions those beliefs, they circle the wagons. They deny the facts. Cade Metz [1].
It would be a sad day for the project when it allows biased opinions masqueraded as "reporting" on the project, its editors, and the principles upon which it stands, influence editorial and/or policy decisions. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:04, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I've only ever seen you talk negatively about the Register's article, are you now saying it's a credible source? If so, I may need to go back to the evidence page. If not, why are you quoting it to bolster your argument (something about a cake, and eating it?)? For the Record, I am against desysopping jossi. In other areas of WP he seems to do a great job, it is only in this sphere of articles I have concerns regarding his actions. -- Maelefique (talk) 02:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Evgeny Morozov has criticized Wikipedia heavily, in past op-ed columns and especially in his books The Net Delusion and To Save Everything, Click Here. This is his "reward".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evgeny_Morozov

Andrew Keen's relatively short book The Cult Of The Amateur had plenty of dismissive things to say about WP. Look at the talkpage for his WP article. Even Jimbo Wales The Wiki God shows up to argue with the nerds. Don't ask me about Steven Walling--he swallowed the kool-aid hard, and despite being pushed out of the WMF, he continues to edit WP routinely. The little bastard.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Andrew_Keen

I can dig up other examples.

[Ognistysztorm]

[...]

The big difference between then and now is cancel culture isn't really such serious back then and presently they no longer enjoy the protection and patronage of pro-Israel cabals; just look at what happened in the Holocaust distortion scandal. Cla68 said before that Wikipedia's powers are dwarfed by that of the overall Jewish interests where they won't stand a chance.

For reference, Weinstein was once protected, coddled and tolerated to the same degree until that NYT article came out.

[Bbb23sucks]

Update: He was b&, and then shortly unbanned again for seemingly no reason.

[ericbarbour]

Update: He was b&, and then shortly unbanned again for seemingly no reason.

There is a reason: he/she? is a deletionist and therefore enjoys the protection of deletionist admins. Look thru this list for examples.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... /Archive_1

[Bbb23sucks]

In the end, he was site banned. But not for his anti-trans squabbling. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ol ... al_attacks

[ericbarbour]

In the end, he was site banned. But not for his anti-trans squabbling. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ol ... al_attacks

Typical AN/I crap. Note that most of the BANBANBAN votes are coming from nobodies who are NOT administrators, are WP edit addicts, and are often sucking up for adminship. Exactly the sort who make "decisions" about banning someone.

I can guarantee this was WP:CANVASSED on IRC or Discord. It's not "disruptive" if insiders do it.

This mutant being typical (he appears to really like Disney and his local tv stations and his userpage is a long rant about his tiresome little personality).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MrSchimpf

[Bbb23sucks]

His TPA was revoked and there was an edit war over whether or not to remove a comment he left: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... on=history

ANI (scroll down past the closed part): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... al_attacks