Anyone would think Jess Wade is suffering severe threats to her wellbeing......

Dedicated to one of the WMF's "finest persons"
Post Reply
User avatar
Jake Is A Sellout
Sucks Critic
Posts: 388
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 45 times

Anyone would think Jess Wade is suffering severe threats to her wellbeing......

Post by Jake Is A Sellout » Mon Jul 26, 2021 3:56 pm

Just once, I'd love to know what drives Wikipedia whackjobs like Zzuuzz, Acroterian and Blablubbs.

Koolaid is powerful stuff, but not this powerful, surely. Power is powerful to, but if they think this is power, well, there are some grade school hall monitors laughing somewhere.

If you look at the amount of time, effort and extreme measures taken to combat and suppress the latest round of AttackTheMoonNow socks, you would think Jess Wade was under serious attack.

And yet when you look, it all seems quite benign. Not a rape threat in sight. No threats to target her workplace. No threats to kill her new puppy.

The extract below seems to be a representative example of the sort of "purely disruptive" material the busy bees have been rushing around trying to block, revert and bury, as part of their futile efforts to DENY anything is wrong.....
This recently created Wikipedia biography (Catherine Chesla) contains an unsourced notability affecting claim, and another statement of a notability affecting claim that is sourced, but doesn't accurately reflect the contents of the source. That is what I noticed after just a few seconds, so it probably has other issues too. Ordinarily I wouldn't consider this a major issue, Wikipedia is after all not exactly known for its rigorous quality control, not even in the supposedly more diligent area of low profile living persons. But this appears to be part of a long history of this specific user showing scant regard for the BLP policy and a real flair for the fraudulent misrepresentation of sources. And whose sole interest in Wikipedia is posting biographies of low profile individuals at an astonishingly high rate of productivity. 
Sure, it's not the most polite complaint, but knowing Wade as I do, it's factually accurate. It would check out. There's nothing in the rule book that says you need to be a card carrying member of the Wikipedia cult, to have a serious complaint taken seriously, especially if it accuses an editor of serious and serial violations of their most important policy.

NewYorkBrad et al have a lot to answer for, since they have in effect overseen an evolution of the culture, never all that professional to begin with, where it doesn't really matter what the rule books says. People like Zzuzz can do what they like, and there is little or no oversight.

You can almost guarantee that none of this gargantuan effort to suppress the truth about Wade, has ever crossed the desk of a Foundation employee, let alone an executive. It surely concerns several departments, from Legal to Public Relations, as awell as, of course, Trust and Safety. I know they like their self governance, but I also know the Foundation doesn't like surprises.

It's certainly not a stretch to say Wade could be topping out at deliberate academic fraud, to take Clarice Phelps as an obvious example. And simple sloppy disregard for BLP is a fair assesment of her daily editing, considering she is allegedly a highly experienced editor.

These high ranking functionaries are probably going to regret taking the collective decision to treat this sort of complaint as if it were as serious as a rape threat. They're probably secretly annoyed this person isn't making such threats, since they could then at least call the police on them. Tactical effort is tactical, it seems.

There was a rather amusing breaking of ranks, however.

In that Chesla article, a BLP violation was fixed.......

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1035573111

....although I don't think that will be enough to satisfy those who seem determined to expose the root cause.

It hardly helps that this only came after the unedifying sight of Acroterian knowingly and wilfully reinstating what he knew to be unsourced content speaking to notability, into the biography. Indefensible, and showing how little he fears these sort of KEEP THE JESS WADE CONTROVERSY HIDDEN AT ALL COSTS type of edits ever being examined in a Wikipedia court. Not even NewYorkBrad could really come up with a defence. BLP is strict for a reason.

The root cause is that Jess Wade is a shit editor. A fraud. She either doesn't know or doesn't care that what she did on that Chesla biography, is unacceptable. And it hardly matters to what degree of unacceptable it was, since that only makes it look like you're trying to find ways to excuse rank incompetence or willful negligence.

We all know the governing precedents and originating scandals, there's no defence to be had that claims this sort of shit editing is somehow minor, especially not when it is so obviously not the product of genuine and occasional mistakes.

For some reason, perhaps simple turnover, the Wikishits never seem to learn the lessons of history, that edit fixer believing the issue to be characterised thusly......
WP:DENY is a thing, but given the BLP nature of the content I did check out the sockpuppets' claim of un-sourced notability information, and while the specific line did not have a reference right next to it, the information was in a reference already present in the article. Much quacking about nothing much.--Eostrix   hoot hoot) 13:12, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Nothing much? :lol:

For a start, why have they only fixed one issue? The "statement of a notability affecting claim that is sourced, but doesn't accurately reflect the contents of the source" is still an issue.

Is Zzuuzz going to fix it? Is Acroterian? Is Blablubbs?

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.

To think, these no marks genuinely think they have power. That "AttackTheMoonNow" must be cowering in their shadow.

I mean, wtf?

For a start, it's obvious they have to range block huge chunks for months, just to get a pause. Which is a bit silly, because when it expires and he inevitably returns, some people have forgotten his characteristics. Still others have forgotten he is smart enough not to have too many characteristics. Still others have forgotten that they're not supposed to be saying his name out loud. Shhhhhhh!!!!

Most of all, they appear to forget the name of the game is to waste their time, if as seems to be the case, getting them to take serious complaints seriously is as pointless as ever. He's probably laughing his ass off. Jess Wade just reliably did what she does, as she does every single day, and that meant that when their shields dropped again, he could attack their Moon Base using a fresh mistake, and occupy the time and energy of many of their elite soldiers, as they scrambled to bend the Matrix to their will.

Nothing to see here! Nothing to see here!

That's time and energy that could have been used against racists, or pedophiles, or Daily Mail journalists.

Does Jess Wade even care? Does she appreciate it at all? Feel guilty at all this wasted time, when she could simply be a better editor and not give them any reason to come a calling. Of course not.

It's fucking hilarious, it really is. What a very weird place. To think, they call themselves a community.

This was pretty funny too...

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

Who knew that their creepy background monitoring tools have a shelf life? Doesn't Princess Wade warrant permanent protection, or is that too taxing on donor dollars? Too many server cycles? Not that it seems like Wade's errors ever get picked up by n00bs all that often, that they would have something to check whether it's a real newbie or a fake newbie. Wikipedia being Wikipedia, eh. I really one day must see if I can find the longest surviving Wade fuckup. Bonus points if it couldn't be fixed because of one of the three amigos, or this creepy tech.

Still, nobody who isn't a card carrying cult member is fixing Catherine Chesla for a while. Good job Acroterian! Muppet. I hope nobody tells Catherine her biography is in error.....

This is a niche activity, sure, and they are bears of limited brains, sure, but can they really not appreciate the AWESOME power of having a list to hand of mistakes in Jess Wade articles that have been reported and never been fixed? That's power. In one case, the dumb bitch herself actually undid a correct fix, so eager was she to exhibit her own idea of what it mean to have power on Wikipedia. The power to gloat. Fool. That she had been all fired up by her enablers doing what they do in similar fashion to this attack, was doubly delicious.

This is what will happen. She'll loop out, having seen and massively misinterpreted the meaning of the interventions by Zzzuzz et al. Like he gives as a fuck about her, really. Do you go around saying dumb shit like "do one, troll", if you're mindful that your nominal role is trying to stop a harasser from returning?

I guess it could be chivalrous, offering his chin as distracting bait, while the Princess makes her escape. But really, a theoretical rapist hardly chooses to instead engage his target's Knight in Shining Armour, does he? He just runs around him. Or shoots him. ATMN by contrast, clearly quite relishes the chance to deck a prat like Zzzuzz. Not that he seems to have the guts to stand his ground.

I'll be kind and note Eostrix is not an Administrator, and a relative newbie in basic editor terms. But it should worry people that their interest in SPI is probably their attempt to lay the groundwork for a run at RfA. They hardly need more people willing to undervalue BLP and overvalue HIVE.

Perhaps due to the efforts of Zzzuzz et al, the diligent error fixer Esotrix is perhaps never even going to realise that this sort of thing is hardly uncommon for Wade, which would mean that even if in isolation they think it is a "nothing much", it quickly adds up to a whole bucket of quite a lot. Indeed, it is an EXTREMELY COMMON example of what a sloppy editor Jess Wade is. Nearly every single article.

It is a pattern. It is something Wikipedia Administrators are theoretically meant to be spotting, and issuing warnings and even blocks for.

Is Eostrix volunteering to detect and fix the rest, for example? I thought not. Nobody is. Some lame people are silently tagging Wade articles as {citation needed}, presumably seeing this as the least triggering way to mitigate her shitness. But it's not comprehensive. And the tags just sit there for months, for obvious reasons.

The Admin corps don't want to warn much less block Wade because, well, she might cry, and they might have a PR problem on their hands.

I have an idea what's coming down the line. I saw some of the posts before they were scrubbed. There is a lot of talk of Jess Wade perhaps committing suicide, in extremis. You can see the logic. She's created almost 300 biographies, and any and all attempts to get her to stop routinely violating BLP as she does so, has been cast as nothing but the ravings of an harasser.

Experienced users are clearly too scared to say anything, even if they aren't social climbers with an eye on an RfA run. I don't blame them. They don't want Zzuuzz on their case, sniffing their personal data. He makes Bbb23 look like a saint.

If this does make it into the media, if for example, a Daily Mail journalist were to doorstep Jess Wade to ask her why she doesn't appparently think it is important to properly source her biographies, and why the Wikipedia Administrators appear to be giving her special exemption from what is a basic and core policy, I definitely think she's going to have some sort of crisis.

Special treatment for the special little flower? Orchestrated mass delusion, shielding her from the reality of her own shitness? Institutional coverups? All because Wikipedia wants the media to really believe she is as good as she thinks she is, good enough to be an "Ambassador", and recruit other women?

Believe me, the only women Wade is recruiting, are ones too dumb to realise Wade is setting a very low bar for what a competent and experienced editor looks like. It's almost laughable to think of her trying to write a Featured Article. She would be hopeless, totally out of her depth. And of course, it would have been fucking hilarious if she had ever tried to become an Administrator herself.

As it is, she seems to have settled comfortably into her niche. Pretty much a mute, working alone, grinding out the same articles, day after day, with the same problems. Wikipedia is for no life losers, yes, but in their company she looks even more pathetic than the mean.

It could have been so different. I don't know what it is about Zzuzz, Acroterian and BlabBlubs. You could say they meet the stereotypical view of Wikipedia Administrators. Not exactly possessing empathy or common sense.

Poor old Jess.

The current range block expires in three months. So even if there isn't going to be a escalation, as was hinted at, that's three months these idiots are going to sit there with their thumbs up their asses, coming up with no new plan to stop another attack. A other half day of running around, chasing their tails.

Another time when Wade has a panic attack, as a flurry of notifications remind her of the ineffectiveness of Wikipedia's Rapist-Be-Gone patented technology. I never know if it's better or worse for the target, to know or not know what was said. Especially since they really do make it seem like someone was making serious threats, rather than merely impolite reminders of basic policy.

With friends like that...... :?

I have an idea. Stop her violating BLP. Take the risk that she takes the huff and retires.

Too simple?

Feel too much like giving in, to the testosterone fueled apes like Zzuuzz?

She is, after all, no longer a media darling. They seem to have lost interest, since all she can really tell them now, is that she has created 50 more.

She would probably benefit from the media not wanting or needing to follow up, in a What Jess Did Next style story. Because her talk page alone, both what's visible and what's been scrubbed, tells the story.

Whatever happens, Wade isn't safe. Whereby of course, these Wikipedia muppets, whether they be rogue actors or the personification of a cult that has really gone right down the rabbit hole, define the prospect of random people being able to lodge perfectly valid complaints, as an unsafe state.

Boo! :lol:

:twisted:

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 2668
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Has thanked: 237 times
Been thanked: 475 times

Re: Anyone would think Jess Wade is suffering severe threats to her wellbeing......

Post by ericbarbour » Tue Jul 27, 2021 4:17 am

if it helps at all here's my picture of Zzuuzz
zzuuzz.jpg
zzuuzz.jpg (44.43 KiB) Viewed 72 times
-----
As a reminder: Why Wikipedia Will Fail, 2015

Post Reply