Blablubbs
CU EFM
A user with 64,794 edits. Account created on 21 October 2014.
Nominated by KevinL and Risker.
Final: (288/5/0) - Closed as successful by Acalamari at 13:19, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Active Administrator, mostly sock hunting. Technocrat.
Barely an editor.
Covid recruit. Burst into life in 2020/1, but in steep decline in 2022/3/4.
Totally useless user page.
Around the Administrators in 80 days....
Re: Around the Administrators in 80 days....
Bobak
A user with 29,039 edits. Account created on 8 July 2005.
Nominated by Y not?
Closed (62/0/1); at 23:15, 23 May 2007
Barely active editor.
Barely active Admin, handful of logged actions per year
Gridiron, Minnesota
Lawyer.
Indef blocked in February!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... User:Bobak
Highly active 2006-09, but been bumbling along at 100-200 edits per year since 2014.
A user with 29,039 edits. Account created on 8 July 2005.
Nominated by Y not?
Closed (62/0/1); at 23:15, 23 May 2007
Barely active editor.
Barely active Admin, handful of logged actions per year
Gridiron, Minnesota
Lawyer.
Indef blocked in February!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... User:Bobak
Highly active 2006-09, but been bumbling along at 100-200 edits per year since 2014.
Re: Around the Administrators in 80 days....
My first unbiased reviews....
https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 89#p351212
I shall continue to "read down a list" and expose what the true nature of Wikipedia's Admin crisis is.
You can continue to be Beeblebrox's personal whaaaambulance......
https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 89#p351189
Vigilant can continue to look the other way at the rank hypocrisy of that so called criticism site.
I mean, who would ever have a problem with someone being so untrustworthy they became the first ever person to be suspended from ArbCom, but is somehow still fit to be a Wikipedia Administrator?
HEY VIGILANT.
Those little bits of cheese Zoloft gives you as a treat. He hides a pill in there.
I mean, come on. What else explains Vigilant's utter docility in the face of such rank behaviour in his house? It can't be his sheer cowardice. I won't have his good name slurred. I will not stand for it!
Imagine if he dared bite one of the queers? Wow. He'd define be put down. Can't take his balls, Zoloft already had those removed. A show of loyalty to Wikipedia. Their transition.
https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 89#p351212
Did Crow end up with a short container load of adderall somehow?
Good job Zoloft. You really retained the cream of the crop.How quaint, they seem to think they're shedding light on this subject, when in reality any braindead gorilla could read down a list. Not exactly ground-breaking research Don't think we're missing their terrific elucidations.
I shall continue to "read down a list" and expose what the true nature of Wikipedia's Admin crisis is.
You can continue to be Beeblebrox's personal whaaaambulance......
https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 89#p351189
Vigilant can continue to look the other way at the rank hypocrisy of that so called criticism site.
I mean, who would ever have a problem with someone being so untrustworthy they became the first ever person to be suspended from ArbCom, but is somehow still fit to be a Wikipedia Administrator?
HEY VIGILANT.
Those little bits of cheese Zoloft gives you as a treat. He hides a pill in there.
I mean, come on. What else explains Vigilant's utter docility in the face of such rank behaviour in his house? It can't be his sheer cowardice. I won't have his good name slurred. I will not stand for it!
Imagine if he dared bite one of the queers? Wow. He'd define be put down. Can't take his balls, Zoloft already had those removed. A show of loyalty to Wikipedia. Their transition.
Re: Around the Administrators in 80 days....
Bobo192
A user with 116,279 edits. Account created on 28 August 2004.
Nominated by Alai
final (34/5/11) ending 19:21, 5 March 2006
Was a serious content creator (89% mainspace) from 2005 to 2009. Disengaged since then. Sole interest now seems to be to defend the existence of cricketer stubs.
Trump, Covid and the deletionists seemed to have caused serious mental health issues for this user.
It's probably not healthy for them to continue to be a Wikipedia editor. They are already a completely inactive Administrator. But the flaw of the INACTIVITY rules is that their level of irritation/addiction is such that they will never be desysopped for inactivity. Wikipedia still engages them anywhere from 50 to 1,000 edits per year. But barring 500 odd edits in August 2009, it's all largely griping, sniping, and general passive aggression.
At least they seem to have the good sense not to be using their tools to express their evident frustrations with how the culture of Wikipedia has changed since he was a believer. That said, he probably is using the ability to view deleted articles to find ways to keep him in engaged in this deeply unhealthy dynamic.
Their single non-trivial logged Admin action over a decade, illuminates their state of mind...
Says a lot that I've not even finsished the Bs and I've already found someone who is being seriously harmed by Wikipedia's almost total lack of supervision of the Admin tool set.
This is what happens when you have self obsessed assholes like Beeblebrox on ArbCom.
This is what happens when Wikipedia criticism sites stop being Wikipedia criticism sites, and instead embark on careers giving head to disaffected Wikipedians.
The real work is done from 50,000 feet. Not down in the maggot ridden battlefield.
Hang your head in shame, Zoloft.
Sorry for having to make you use your weak little thumb, Vigilant.
Nothing for you here though. Nobody to blame for this situation except EVERYONE who believes Wikipedia is a good thing. Take a look around at the scum you call your confederates. Your protectors and enablers. The MintyMen. The queers. The true believers.
You think they let you be all the little puppy you can be to expose things like this? This guy's eternal torment at the hands of the beast?
You think they expelled me because I'm not a seriously effective critic?
HA HA HA HA HA
They banned me because I'm better than you in every way.
You make Wikipedians laugh with your pathetic attempts to be scary. There's never been more fairies over there. Subwoofers of virtue. Selfish little activists. Crybabies.
You can allegedly hurt them with mere words. But they are surprisingly fine with Wikipedia killing people. It's own people.
HAS ANYONE SEEN MOLLY WHITE
PAGING MOLLY WHITE
Virtue needed on aisle three. Right up the street of a former Arbitrator.
As if.
I take their souls. I hold a mirror to their dark emptiness. The empty void that is their "project".
That's how you break someone. That's how I broke you. You fucking crybaby. Whaaaaaa.
That's why they let me post for months. Little old me. They like seeing you cry.
The work continues. Exposing who sucks.
I am the Bastard. You know the story of the Little Crow. The man who can't be killed. The watcher on the wall.
He rises from the deep. He swoops from the skies. He can even travel through space!
TheMintyMen can pop as many mints as they like. Elinruby can have as many fits of the vapours as they like.
Their breath will still smell of Wikipedia dick.
Beeblejizz.
That's your legacy. That's who you are, Vigilant.
As in, not very. Or complicit.
A user with 116,279 edits. Account created on 28 August 2004.
Nominated by Alai
final (34/5/11) ending 19:21, 5 March 2006
Was a serious content creator (89% mainspace) from 2005 to 2009. Disengaged since then. Sole interest now seems to be to defend the existence of cricketer stubs.
Trump, Covid and the deletionists seemed to have caused serious mental health issues for this user.
It's probably not healthy for them to continue to be a Wikipedia editor. They are already a completely inactive Administrator. But the flaw of the INACTIVITY rules is that their level of irritation/addiction is such that they will never be desysopped for inactivity. Wikipedia still engages them anywhere from 50 to 1,000 edits per year. But barring 500 odd edits in August 2009, it's all largely griping, sniping, and general passive aggression.
At least they seem to have the good sense not to be using their tools to express their evident frustrations with how the culture of Wikipedia has changed since he was a believer. That said, he probably is using the ability to view deleted articles to find ways to keep him in engaged in this deeply unhealthy dynamic.
Their single non-trivial logged Admin action over a decade, illuminates their state of mind...
Inconceivable that they would pass RfA today. They need serious help.14:33, 18 April 2019 Bobo192 talk contribs created page Clive Ricks (I hadn't realized this article had been deleted - by PROD, as I received no such notification. This article passes CRIN absolutely.
Says a lot that I've not even finsished the Bs and I've already found someone who is being seriously harmed by Wikipedia's almost total lack of supervision of the Admin tool set.
This is what happens when you have self obsessed assholes like Beeblebrox on ArbCom.
This is what happens when Wikipedia criticism sites stop being Wikipedia criticism sites, and instead embark on careers giving head to disaffected Wikipedians.
The real work is done from 50,000 feet. Not down in the maggot ridden battlefield.
Hang your head in shame, Zoloft.
Sorry for having to make you use your weak little thumb, Vigilant.
Nothing for you here though. Nobody to blame for this situation except EVERYONE who believes Wikipedia is a good thing. Take a look around at the scum you call your confederates. Your protectors and enablers. The MintyMen. The queers. The true believers.
You think they let you be all the little puppy you can be to expose things like this? This guy's eternal torment at the hands of the beast?
You think they expelled me because I'm not a seriously effective critic?
HA HA HA HA HA
They banned me because I'm better than you in every way.
You make Wikipedians laugh with your pathetic attempts to be scary. There's never been more fairies over there. Subwoofers of virtue. Selfish little activists. Crybabies.
You can allegedly hurt them with mere words. But they are surprisingly fine with Wikipedia killing people. It's own people.
HAS ANYONE SEEN MOLLY WHITE
PAGING MOLLY WHITE
Virtue needed on aisle three. Right up the street of a former Arbitrator.
As if.
I take their souls. I hold a mirror to their dark emptiness. The empty void that is their "project".
That's how you break someone. That's how I broke you. You fucking crybaby. Whaaaaaa.
That's why they let me post for months. Little old me. They like seeing you cry.
The work continues. Exposing who sucks.
I am the Bastard. You know the story of the Little Crow. The man who can't be killed. The watcher on the wall.
He rises from the deep. He swoops from the skies. He can even travel through space!
TheMintyMen can pop as many mints as they like. Elinruby can have as many fits of the vapours as they like.
Their breath will still smell of Wikipedia dick.
Beeblejizz.
That's your legacy. That's who you are, Vigilant.
As in, not very. Or complicit.
Re: Around the Administrators in 80 days....
Bongwarrior
A user with 158,628 edits. Account created on 28 July 2006.
Active editor, patroller.
Active Administrator, but surprising how little they actually use their tools considering their activity.
Genuinely odd to see they have blocked over 17,000 accounts, yet have pressed that button only once this year. Same for deletions. 22,000+, yet hasn't pressed the button since 2022.
On their way out the door? Burned out?
Heavily committed for year on year, but perhaps had a life change or revelation in 2013. Reduced to a third of their prior levels. Struggled along for a few years, but a mere 268 edits in 2023 was really quite pathetic for them.
Wikipedia probably can't survive without replacing this kind of Admin.
You are the help.
Perhaps Wikipedia should have listened to the smoke signals......
It is supposed to be a community building an encyclopedia, after all. A human endeavour. Being calm, polite and clueful is fine. Having made nearly 160,000 edits without anyone knowing who you are, probably isn't.
Not the first time I've found an Administrator without a user page, who probably doesn't really get what Wikipedia is, on a fundamental level. There are content creations. But when, why, now long ago? Who knows. Hardly a surprise to see it is almost exclusively popular culture. Did they achieve much for Great Barrier Reef, their second highest article count? Reverting vandals, natch.....
https://sigma.toolforge.org/usersearch. ... nwiki&max=
Perhaps people like this stoner have been rendered obsolete by bots. Not hard to see why that would have been quite an easy job for the notoriously crap coders who work/volunteer for Wikipedia.
Just say no kids.
Josh is one of Wikipedia's newest Admin recruits. (315/3/0) in September 2023.
The new Bong, a polite clueful patroller.
Fewer in number, making way more edits. Tougher job interview. More human. Has a user page! Can do content! Popular culture.
Not a great way to run a Police Department, though, surely. Maybe for San Fran, but not Gotham.
At least he's not going to fail a piss test!
His drug of choice is........?
The darkness is yet to come, Josh. You have yet to have your dark night of the soul. Your 2013.
PROTECT THE LITTLE ONES JOSH.
The little padawans.
Daddy is coming. And he knows what you do in your bedroom all night long......
A user with 158,628 edits. Account created on 28 July 2006.
Self nom, (56/6/1)23:15, 5 November 2007 Rdsmith4 talk contribs changed group membership for Bongwarrior from (none) to administrator (well-dressed; impeccable penmanship)
Active editor, patroller.
Active Administrator, but surprising how little they actually use their tools considering their activity.
Genuinely odd to see they have blocked over 17,000 accounts, yet have pressed that button only once this year. Same for deletions. 22,000+, yet hasn't pressed the button since 2022.
On their way out the door? Burned out?
Heavily committed for year on year, but perhaps had a life change or revelation in 2013. Reduced to a third of their prior levels. Struggled along for a few years, but a mere 268 edits in 2023 was really quite pathetic for them.
Wikipedia probably can't survive without replacing this kind of Admin.
Help is NOT on the way Josh.00:37, 13 July 2022 Bongwarrior talk contribs deleted page User:Not trying to harass Hey may Im josh but succeeding (G10: Attack page)
You are the help.
Perhaps Wikipedia should have listened to the smoke signals......
Oppose Insufficient contribution of actual encyclopedic content. Fighting defenseless teenage jokers is not what builds the character of an admin. I don't think we need professional police here. `'Míkka 23:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Insufficient evidence of interaction with the community. You appear to be an interested and effective vandal fighter, but I expect more than that from admin candidates. Right now less than 2% of your edits are in Talk/Wikipedia talk and from browsing them it appears that a majority of even that small number are strictly vandal reversions. Keep doing what you are doing, as a vandal fighter, but I'd like to see you get more involved in the community before adminship. Dragons flight 18:47, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia made some moves to require content contributions from potential Admins. But it always felt like a crude way of addressing the real concern. Are people like Bong only interested in Wikipedia for the dope? The time wasting video game."Bongwarrior" is an unprofessional, inappropriate username. Wikipedia does not exist in a vacuum. Every so often an administrator's actions are viewed as notable by outside media sources, and if they publish a news report talking about what "Wikipedia administrator Bongwarrior" did, we all look like idiots. --Cyde Weys 22:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
It is supposed to be a community building an encyclopedia, after all. A human endeavour. Being calm, polite and clueful is fine. Having made nearly 160,000 edits without anyone knowing who you are, probably isn't.
Not the first time I've found an Administrator without a user page, who probably doesn't really get what Wikipedia is, on a fundamental level. There are content creations. But when, why, now long ago? Who knows. Hardly a surprise to see it is almost exclusively popular culture. Did they achieve much for Great Barrier Reef, their second highest article count? Reverting vandals, natch.....
https://sigma.toolforge.org/usersearch. ... nwiki&max=
Perhaps people like this stoner have been rendered obsolete by bots. Not hard to see why that would have been quite an easy job for the notoriously crap coders who work/volunteer for Wikipedia.
Just say no kids.
Josh is one of Wikipedia's newest Admin recruits. (315/3/0) in September 2023.
The new Bong, a polite clueful patroller.
Fewer in number, making way more edits. Tougher job interview. More human. Has a user page! Can do content! Popular culture.
Not a great way to run a Police Department, though, surely. Maybe for San Fran, but not Gotham.
At least he's not going to fail a piss test!
His drug of choice is........?
Hmmm.This user really enjoys dark and stormy nights.
The darkness is yet to come, Josh. You have yet to have your dark night of the soul. Your 2013.
PROTECT THE LITTLE ONES JOSH.
The little padawans.
Daddy is coming. And he knows what you do in your bedroom all night long......
-
ericbarbour
- Sucks Admin
- Posts: 4694
- Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
- Location: The ass-tral plane
- Has thanked: 1185 times
- Been thanked: 1889 times
Re: Around the Administrators in 80 days....
A very common pattern for early admins. Burnout occurs after 4-8 years of supporting the "cult" and fighting with random idiots.
Rare occurrence, but then NO ONE is permitted to fight with or criticize Drmies, are they?
Last edited by ericbarbour on Thu May 09, 2024 7:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Around the Administrators in 80 days....
BorgHunter
A user with 6,672 edits. Account created on 28 February 2005.
Self nomination
Final (23/6/0) ended 05:15 20 December 2005
Life support?
Negligible tool use in the last decade, no logged actions since June 2022.
Half of all edits were in 2006. Hasn't cracked 100 since 2010, hasn't cracked 25 for nine of those years, hence last 500 edits goes back to May 2010. No edits so far in 2024.
Was tracking their "mi!estones" up until their 3,000th edit. Oh dear.
Resistance isn't quite futile, but it's looking pretty hopeless.
Even this zombie is deemed ACTIVE.....they don't even need to make a single edit in 2024.
A user with 6,672 edits. Account created on 28 February 2005.
Self nomination
Final (23/6/0) ended 05:15 20 December 2005
Life support?
Negligible tool use in the last decade, no logged actions since June 2022.
Half of all edits were in 2006. Hasn't cracked 100 since 2010, hasn't cracked 25 for nine of those years, hence last 500 edits goes back to May 2010. No edits so far in 2024.
Was tracking their "mi!estones" up until their 3,000th edit. Oh dear.
Resistance isn't quite futile, but it's looking pretty hopeless.
Even this zombie is deemed ACTIVE.....they don't even need to make a single edit in 2024.
Re: Around the Administrators in 80 days....
Day 8 in the bag.
10% done. Easy.
Too hard for the numpties of Wikipediocracy.
10% done. Easy.
Too hard for the numpties of Wikipediocracy.
Re: Around the Administrators in 80 days....
BorgQueen
A user with 100,503 edits. Account created on 13 August 2005.
Unlike her nemesis, the Queen of the Borg is a model Wikipedian.
Indeed, she's had him on toast since forever. He was even her nominator!
And she beat him.....
final (31/1/1) ending 06:13 28 December 2005
He has never recovered from the humiliation, clearly.
She's an active editor, steadily improving articles and identifying others that need improvement.
They're also an active editor in the very worst place you would want the Borg Queen to be, helping out on Main Page stuff.
Only an occasional visitor to the drama boards, for obvious reasons.
Only occasionally directly uses her tools. Must be keen not to be seen as aloof among her subjects.
Surprisingly human profile between 2005 and 2012. Never quite left the collective, and was reassimilated in 2022, with 2023 being her second most active year ever.
Quietly learning about human civilisation.
Possibly a sock of Bishonen. There can't be two people who miss Giano, surely?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1172253402
Too funny for words.....
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1151060516
Spectacularly cruel when necessary.....
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1157355438
A user with 100,503 edits. Account created on 13 August 2005.
Unlike her nemesis, the Queen of the Borg is a model Wikipedian.
Indeed, she's had him on toast since forever. He was even her nominator!
And she beat him.....
final (31/1/1) ending 06:13 28 December 2005
He has never recovered from the humiliation, clearly.
She's an active editor, steadily improving articles and identifying others that need improvement.
They're also an active editor in the very worst place you would want the Borg Queen to be, helping out on Main Page stuff.
Only an occasional visitor to the drama boards, for obvious reasons.
Only occasionally directly uses her tools. Must be keen not to be seen as aloof among her subjects.
Surprisingly human profile between 2005 and 2012. Never quite left the collective, and was reassimilated in 2022, with 2023 being her second most active year ever.
Quietly learning about human civilisation.
Possibly a sock of Bishonen. There can't be two people who miss Giano, surely?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1172253402
Too funny for words.....
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1151060516
Spectacularly cruel when necessary.....
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1157355438