Wikipedia Sucks!

This guy is a classic example of the sort of obsessive writer in niche topics who really destroyed any pretence that Wikipedia is meant to be an encyclopedia, written to cater for readers. So much so he was actually called out the by the WMF by name as an example of the sort of selfish, self-absorbed hobbyist type editor that Wikipedia really doesn't need. He didn't like it much, but it evidently hasn't caused him to change course.

If anything, he's actually got worse. This current schism inducing mess is all down to him apparently.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... nomination)

What a nice biography to put on the Main Page so soon after International Women's Day. Unbelievably, he genuinely seems to think this is what is meant when people bemoan the lack of articles about notable women from history on Wikipedia.

Unbelievably, he's doubling down on the idea the only reason these articles are being deleted is because they are women.

As such, no matter how many AfDs it takes the "delete because woman" folks will keep on shooting until they win (one of the quirks of Wikipedia is that "keep" can always be re-litigated but "delete" is permanent), so there's not a great deal of point in finishing these off. ‑ Iridescent 08:34, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

He is either trolling, or is incredibly thick. Given he is demonstrably not thick, and given his prior statements and allies on the gender gap, and given the very obvious fact that "delete" is not permanent (assuming you have a better article to recreate) and a previous "keep" is actually often used to stifle any attempt to relitigate, the answer has to be the former.

Iridescent displays a splendid piece of pot-kettling: an IP user modestly suggests that perhaps Iridescent shouldn't be hosting porn on his user page, and Iridescent responds by accusing the IP of being an anonymous coward, and outing the IP as a named user who publishes his true identity. So, Iridescent, what is your real name and employer's address then? Or is being a pseudonymous coward quite different from being an anonymous coward?

Iridescent wrote:This is my personal talk page, not a public-facing or project page....... I find it unlikely anyone who would be offended by any of the images in the rotation

Well, we could carefully lay out the Wikipedia policy basis for why he is wrong. Or we could just let Twitter decide. It seems only fitting for someone who would stoop to threaten to call someone's employer over such a trivial comment, even if he is 100% right in his assumptions.

you do realise that by posting here you've now drawn the attention of the entire Arbcom, the whole of Wikipediocracy and a sizeable chunk of the admin and editor corps to your antics? ‑ Iridescent 23:59, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

What a bizarre way to react to anyone leaving you a message on Wikipedia.

Still, I guess we know how hard Wikipedians will fight for their right to converse in terms like this......

if I see any more shit like that from you you can argue your case via an {unblock} template

Isn't it typical of a veteran Wikipedia Administrator, to act surprised that a clear attempt to intimidate a user, well beyond the bounds of their office (their shiny Sheriff badge only authorising them to calmly and politely advise and warn, not rudely threaten), simply solicited a template warning from said user for behavioural policy breaches?

It was as typical as them deciding the best course of action on receipt of that warning, is to double down, inferring the user will now be harassed not only by the great and good of Wikipedia, but the members of the "hate site" that this scumbag clearly considers as friends and allies.

Predictably, there was lots of discussion of this incident from a variety of Wikipedians. Not one dared take issue with the bullying nature of Iridescent, his obvious unfitness to be an Administrator, which is of course entirely possible to do without endorsing the other user's behaviour.

The cackling spectators were quite happy to berate the visitor for the wrong choice of template, or even that he chose a template. And much amusement was had besides. Gotta have your priorities straight. It's certainly a strange way to use what Iridescent goes on to describe as.....

this page has a double role as a de facto community noticeboard as well as a personal talkpage.

Wait.....I thought he thought his talk page had no public facing or project role all? Yes, he said so in the post above!

These people are scum. It says everything about Wikipediocracy that they see them as allies and comrades. Both sites are hate sites. Both sites have people like this on them, who absolve deserve to be held accountable. By any means necessary.

.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =858034680

For someone whose team essentially won the 'what is Wikipedia ' argument (a self publishing platform for fanboys and hobbyists), he sure is still pissed at being justifiably called out for it.

Why does he even still care? Their comprehensive victory meant the WMF couldn't be the least bit interested in marketing themeselves as facilitators of an encyclopedia anymore, much less boasting about the quality of their core articles. They're an embarrassing state precisely because of what Wikipedians really are.

As amusing as it is to think he thinks the WMF would seriously try and sell Wikipedia as the world's finest, if not the only resource for lovers of the Disneyland Railroad, they know what a non-starter that really is. This is decidedly not what was meant when they said 'we're so much more than just a free Brittanica'.

Are there some problematic uploads on Wikipedia such as files uploaded under an incorrect license? Sure. Is this something so problematic that it requires a mass sweep through every image file? No, or WMF Legal would employ someone to audit them properly; the existing mechanism of people flagging problematic files as and when they come across them or they're brought to our attention by rights holders has worked fine for 17 years.

Fucking moron.

Even worse, this was no general musing, he said it as part of a transparent attempt to harass a user off of Wikipedia, someone who is attempting to tackle copyright issues on a mass scale. It appears to be working.

This guy is a threat to Wikipedia's future. If they want their project to survive, they really need to start sending people who say dumb shit like this......

To be blunt, I don't give two hoots about The pending implementation of Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons (and other projects), and nor should anyone else.

.....to a re-education facility.

Almost half of what he says about Wikipedia is uninformed garbage. This other half is just self-serving whining.

Still, we can take some joy in the fact that so far, he doesn't believe he has been an "unpaid shill" of Big Internet. Who knows, maybe he chooses not to properly understand these things he holds forth about, because the truth would totally destroy him.

What an arrogant piece of shit.

Unless and until you've lived there, one really can't appreciate just how big a deal veterans are in the US compared to any other country

Unless you live outside of the US, you will absolutely not appreciate to what level of detail the rest of the world is subjected to their quirks.

Thank you for your service. Dumbass.

I was previously under the impression he was a Brit anyway, which if so, makes it an even more horrifically arrogant comment.

CrowsNest wrote:What an arrogant piece of shit.

Unless and until you've lived there, one really can't appreciate just how big a deal veterans are in the US compared to any other country

Unless you live outside of the US, you will absolutely not appreciate to what level of detail the rest of the world is subjected to their quirks.

Thank you for your service. Dumbass.

I was previously under the impression he was a Brit anyway, which if so, makes it an even more horrifically arrogant comment.

Also veterans are a big deal in the UK and other countries as well, making this statement even more dumbassry than before because he thinks the US is somehow the only country where veterans matter.

The royal family spend way over half their time on charities for veterans for petes sake. Some of the Princes are actually veterans themselves!

Bump for ceranthor.