Jess Wade is living proof Wikipedia policy is meaningless. For her anyway.
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2023 2:31 pm
Jess Wade's latest biography is for Indian quantum physicist Urbasi Sinha.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1184352701
As usual, the page looks superficially acceptable. But Wade being Wade, it takes an experienced Wikipedia editor only a few seconds to spot the usual signs of her attrociously bad practices. Shit that is unacceptable from a novice, let alone someone with her supposed experience.
The biography curiously doesn't provide a source for the claim that Sinha was the recipient of the South Indian Education Society's 2023 Eminence Award in the Science & Technology category.
I have no idea if this award is a big deal or not, all I know is it sounds pretty cool, and courtesy of Google's relationships with Wikipedia, it has been accepted knowledge since 9th November 2023.
There's just one small problem. The SIES's own website doesn't yet list the winners of the 2023 Eminence Award....
http://www.siesedu.net/awards/eminence_awards.php
So where did Wade get his information? It seems likely she got it from a source that isn't independent of Sinha. She just hasn't included it.
I suppose we should be glad this might be a sign that Wade has at least realized it is totally unacceptable to source BLP caims that speak to notability, achievement or prestige, to non-independent sources.
Her solution however, is typically Wade.
She just puts it in Wikipedia without a source.
She knows it is true, she wants the world to learn how awesome this person is, and thanks to Wikipedia, she has the ability to instantly publish what Wade thinks the world needs to know about them.
It is a quaint throwback to Wikipedia of a decade ago, before they started to take their responsibilities seriously. You either properly source your Wikipedia garbage, or you leave it out of Wikipedia.
Why is Wade allowed to get away with it? Just Google her own name. According to countless news stories written by journalists who clearly don't have the first fucking clue what a responsibie, experienced, praise worthy Wikipedia editor looks like, Wade is awesome.
Wade is a cunt. She CLEARLY knows what she is doing is wrong, but she also knows that there are large numbers of Wikipedia editors who have her back. They value her as a PR tool far more than they value being able to say Wikipedia policy is enforced rigorously and without fear or favour. They will quite happily go to extraordinary lengths to stop you correcting this problem the way it is usually corrected when the editor isn't called Wade.
The question is therefore, what can you do about it? Assuming this pisses you off. If it doesn't annoy you, then fuck off to Wikipediocracy and spend your days sucking the cocks of the most corrupt Wikipedians that ever lived, courtesy of your genial host Jake.
The sad truth of Wikipedia is, when legitimate avenues are closed to you, illegitimate avenues do work. In short, harassment works.
And even if it doesn't, well, you wouldn't be human if you didn't enjoy making the lives of the entitled and privelaged among us just that little bit more miserable, right?
Corruption flourishes in any self policed environment, for as long as the common man doesn't stand up and be counted.
HTD.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1184352701
As usual, the page looks superficially acceptable. But Wade being Wade, it takes an experienced Wikipedia editor only a few seconds to spot the usual signs of her attrociously bad practices. Shit that is unacceptable from a novice, let alone someone with her supposed experience.
The biography curiously doesn't provide a source for the claim that Sinha was the recipient of the South Indian Education Society's 2023 Eminence Award in the Science & Technology category.
I have no idea if this award is a big deal or not, all I know is it sounds pretty cool, and courtesy of Google's relationships with Wikipedia, it has been accepted knowledge since 9th November 2023.
There's just one small problem. The SIES's own website doesn't yet list the winners of the 2023 Eminence Award....
http://www.siesedu.net/awards/eminence_awards.php
So where did Wade get his information? It seems likely she got it from a source that isn't independent of Sinha. She just hasn't included it.
I suppose we should be glad this might be a sign that Wade has at least realized it is totally unacceptable to source BLP caims that speak to notability, achievement or prestige, to non-independent sources.
Her solution however, is typically Wade.
She just puts it in Wikipedia without a source.
She knows it is true, she wants the world to learn how awesome this person is, and thanks to Wikipedia, she has the ability to instantly publish what Wade thinks the world needs to know about them.
It is a quaint throwback to Wikipedia of a decade ago, before they started to take their responsibilities seriously. You either properly source your Wikipedia garbage, or you leave it out of Wikipedia.
Why is Wade allowed to get away with it? Just Google her own name. According to countless news stories written by journalists who clearly don't have the first fucking clue what a responsibie, experienced, praise worthy Wikipedia editor looks like, Wade is awesome.
Wade is a cunt. She CLEARLY knows what she is doing is wrong, but she also knows that there are large numbers of Wikipedia editors who have her back. They value her as a PR tool far more than they value being able to say Wikipedia policy is enforced rigorously and without fear or favour. They will quite happily go to extraordinary lengths to stop you correcting this problem the way it is usually corrected when the editor isn't called Wade.
The question is therefore, what can you do about it? Assuming this pisses you off. If it doesn't annoy you, then fuck off to Wikipediocracy and spend your days sucking the cocks of the most corrupt Wikipedians that ever lived, courtesy of your genial host Jake.
The sad truth of Wikipedia is, when legitimate avenues are closed to you, illegitimate avenues do work. In short, harassment works.
And even if it doesn't, well, you wouldn't be human if you didn't enjoy making the lives of the entitled and privelaged among us just that little bit more miserable, right?
Corruption flourishes in any self policed environment, for as long as the common man doesn't stand up and be counted.
HTD.