Bbb23 power abuse - video parody

One of the worst admins in WP history lol
User avatar
CMAwatch
Sucks Critic
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2019 1:26 pm
Location: Community Moderation Abuse Watch
Has thanked: 114 times
Been thanked: 32 times

Bbb23 power abuse - video parody

Post by CMAwatch » Sun Oct 27, 2019 1:35 pm

I usually like Wikipedia, but then I happened to encounter the following document written by a victim of Bbb23's abusive practices:
http://tinyurl.com/Bbb23abuse

Therefore, I made this edited video:



Hopefully you like it. Enjoy.
#BbbGate
Weaponizing WP:G5
Oops! Didn't think we'd see? It's right there on WikipediaSucks.co!
ericbarbour wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:22 am
[Wikipedia is] a stupid video game, and the "encyclopedia" is an accidental byproduct.

User avatar
JuiceBeetle
Sucks Mod
Posts: 681
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2019 8:27 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 43 times

The mystery of "Count Count"

Post by JuiceBeetle » Sun Oct 27, 2019 4:41 pm

The investigators found that the page deletion nominator "Count Count" is a 2 years old account, that started as an experienced user in September 2017 with recent changes patrolling both on German and English wikipedias:
https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spezial:Beitr%C3%A4ge/Count_Count&dir=prev&target=Count+Count
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Count_Count&dir=prev&target=Count+Count
Became an arbitrator in November 2018 :o on dewiki, mostly because there were too few candidates:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Schiedsgericht/Wahl/November_2018/Count_Count
The user is not too active: https://tools.wmflabs.org/guc/?by=date&user=Count+Count
In fact, his contributions are campaign-like / intermittent, that's unlike regular users, and more like a second account farming edit-count.

He's not active on commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Count_Count
Thus the question arises, how did he become aware of the page within 10 hours? https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Handroid7/Bbb23&action=history http://archive.ph/g0udd
11:57, 20 October 2019‎ Count Count talk contribs‎ 10,064 bytes +54‎ delete: attack page
02:22, 20 October 2019‎ Handroid7 talk contribs‎ 9,845 bytes +9,845‎ Let's document it here, then. Original content is appropriate on Wikimedia Commons.

Wasn't active on meta since 10 October:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?target=Count+Count&namespace=all&tagfilter=&start=&end=2019-10-21&limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions
It's unlikely he would notice the deletion of the complaint page on meta, that was done within a few hours, unannounced by Billinghurst, not visible on any noticeboards:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special ... tagfilter=

It's clear, he didn't find that page by mistake or patrolling. At best he is a meatpuppet, at worst and adminsock.
So who is this mysterious "Count Count", and what is his association with Bbb23? It sounds unlikely, that Bbb23 has learned German and farmed a sock into an arbitrator on dewiki.

User avatar
CMAwatch
Sucks Critic
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2019 1:26 pm
Location: Community Moderation Abuse Watch
Has thanked: 114 times
Been thanked: 32 times

Re: The mystery of "Count Count"

Post by CMAwatch » Sun Oct 27, 2019 5:09 pm

JuiceBeetle wrote:The investigators found that the page deletion nominator "Count Count" is a 2 years old account, that started as an experienced user in September 2017 with recent changes patrolling both on German and English wikipedias:
https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spezial:Beitr%C3%A4ge/Count_Count&dir=prev&target=Count+Count
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Count_Count&dir=prev&target=Count+Count
Became an arbitrator in November 2018 :o on dewiki, mostly because there were too few candidates:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Schiedsgericht/Wahl/November_2018/Count_Count
The user is not too active: https://tools.wmflabs.org/guc/?by=date&user=Count+Count
In fact, his contributions are campaign-like / intermittent, that's unlike regular users, and more like a second account farming edit-count.

He's not active on commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Count_Count
Thus the question arises, how did he become aware of the page within 10 hours? https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Handroid7/Bbb23&action=history http://archive.ph/g0udd
11:57, 20 October 2019‎ Count Count talk contribs‎ 10,064 bytes +54‎ delete: attack page
02:22, 20 October 2019‎ Handroid7 talk contribs‎ 9,845 bytes +9,845‎ Let's document it here, then. Original content is appropriate on Wikimedia Commons.

Wasn't active on meta since 10 October:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?target=Count+Count&namespace=all&tagfilter=&start=&end=2019-10-21&limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions
It's unlikely he would notice the deletion of the complaint page on meta, that was done within a few hours, unannounced by Billinghurst, not visible on any noticeboards:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special ... tagfilter=

It's clear, he didn't find that page by mistake or patrolling. At best he is a meatpuppet, at worst and adminsock.
So who is this mysterious "Count Count", and what is his association with Bbb23? It sounds unlikely, that Bbb23 has learned German and farmed a sock into an arbitrator on dewiki.


Also, Handroid7's report appears perfectly legitimate to me, no attack page.
#BbbGate
Weaponizing WP:G5
Oops! Didn't think we'd see? It's right there on WikipediaSucks.co!
ericbarbour wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:22 am
[Wikipedia is] a stupid video game, and the "encyclopedia" is an accidental byproduct.

User avatar
CMAwatch
Sucks Critic
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2019 1:26 pm
Location: Community Moderation Abuse Watch
Has thanked: 114 times
Been thanked: 32 times

Unable to reply to PM

Post by CMAwatch » Sun Oct 27, 2019 6:00 pm

@JuiceBeetle I got your private message, but I am not unable to reply to it.

“We are sorry, but you are not authorised to use this feature. You may have just registered here and may need to participate more to be able to use this feature. ”

I encountered Handroid7's original message on the MetaWiki noticeboard.

It was removed from there, and also deleted his Meta user namespace.
#BbbGate
Weaponizing WP:G5
Oops! Didn't think we'd see? It's right there on WikipediaSucks.co!
ericbarbour wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:22 am
[Wikipedia is] a stupid video game, and the "encyclopedia" is an accidental byproduct.

User avatar
JuiceBeetle
Sucks Mod
Posts: 681
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2019 8:27 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 43 times

Re: Video parody: Bbb23 power abuse (+ abuse report)

Post by JuiceBeetle » Sun Oct 27, 2019 6:23 pm

CMAwatch wrote:I got your private message, but I am not unable to reply to it.

Don't worry, only while you are "recently registered".

CMAwatch wrote:I encountered Handroid7's original message on the MetaWiki noticeboard.

I haven't found it, link it please.

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Video parody: Bbb23 power abuse (+ abuse report)

Post by CrowsNest » Sun Oct 27, 2019 6:23 pm

Fuck me, is this really another Kumioko sock?

Seriously? :roll:

User avatar
JuiceBeetle
Sucks Mod
Posts: 681
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2019 8:27 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 43 times

Are administrator conduct complaints attacks?

Post by JuiceBeetle » Sun Oct 27, 2019 7:25 pm

The abuse report:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Handroid7/Bbb23 (http://archive.fo/JnVx6, Web archive)

Proposed for deletion within 10 hours by the unknown "Count Count" with the reason "attack page": https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/User:Handroid7/Bbb23

Is this an attack page?
"An attack page is a page, in any namespace, that exists primarily to disparage or threaten its subject; or biographical material that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced or poorly sourced." (WP:ATTACK)

This is not "biographical material", does not "threaten its subject", and it does not "exist primarily to disparage" its subject. Thus it is not an attack page, according to this definition.
However, it does disparage its subject in some sentences, and that's enough to justify deleting all the proper complaints.

Removing those comments would make it easier to argue that this is not an attack page:

The page title should not name the accused -> "About administrator conduct"
"Had this document been published on the English Wikipedia, Bbb23 would likely erase it immediately, reinforcing the evidence against him."
-> "This page is a good faith attempt to report contested administrator conduct, that could not be made on English Wikipedia."
“Why would he delete it, if he could? Maybe to cover up something shady about him?” -- Speculations undermine the credibility of the reporter.
"Shady practices" -> "Administrator conduct questions"
"Bbb23 ran amok" -> "Bbb23 reverted all my edits, even reinstating vandalism. This was an unnecessary, excessive action, that caused trouble to other editors too."
"Need I say more?" -> "My inquiries about his decisions were unanswered."

General rule to question admin conduct: Only present the facts. Make them look damning, but don't speculate on the interpretation of those facts.

User avatar
JuiceBeetle
Sucks Mod
Posts: 681
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2019 8:27 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 43 times

Meta "drama" patrol

Post by JuiceBeetle » Sun Oct 27, 2019 8:14 pm

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Handroid7/Bbb23 was deleted with the reason:
"23:52, 19 October 2019 Billinghurst deleted page User:Handroid7/Bbb23 (G7: Out of project scope: please read Meta's inclusion policy: meta is not a page to build pages about other people's activities)"

NOT for being an attack page: G9
G9: "Attack pages: content created solely to attack, threaten or denigrate any user, person or organization. See the Resolution on biographies of living people and our Terms of Use § 4."
Billinghurst does not indicate, that this is an attack page (however that would be a stronger reason to delete), contrary to CountCount's belief. Presumably he's more experienced, and more careful.

G7: "Content which is clearly out of scope, such as encyclopedic articles, dictionary definitions, and any other material that is best suited on any other Wikimedia Project."
Is this report an "encyclopedic article", a "dictionary definition", or "any other material that is best suited on any other Wikimedia Project"? No, this is not "content"/"material".

According to the linked Meta:Inclusion_policy:
"The following content is appropriate on Meta: Documentation and discussion concerning the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects (see some current discussions). ... "

This report is the documentation and discussion concerning administrator conduct on one of the Wikimedia Foundation projects.
Generally, Meta is the place where governance issues that cannot be discussed on the projects, can take place, such as the widespread admin abuse on the Croatian wiki:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Site-wide_administrator_abuse_and_WP:PILLARS_violations_on_the_Croatian_Wikipedia#Proposed_actions
Listed here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Goings-on#October_2019

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Billinghurst is a sysop on 5+ wikis (enwiki since 2009) + global sysop. The account was registered in 2008.

Timeline:
The report was made at 02:44, 19 October 2019‎ (UTC)
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta:Requests_for_help_from_a_sysop_or_bureaucrat&diff=19470784&oldid=19469716
He reverted this report on WM:RFH at 03:20, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta:Requests_for_help_from_a_sysop_or_bureaucrat&diff=prev&oldid=19470815
And explained it at 03:23, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Handroid7#Metawiki_is_not_a_complaints_forum_for_the_disgrunted
Then deleted the page too at 23:52, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Handroid7/Bbb23

Commons page was created at 02:22, 20 October 2019
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Handroid7/Bbb23&oldid=371219416 http://archive.ph/aKTqJ
History:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Handroid7/Bbb23&action=history http://archive.ph/g0udd

Count Count joined at 11:57, 20 October 2019‎
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Handroid7/Bbb23&diff=371258178&oldid=371258084
NinjaRobotPirate joined at 19:17, 20 October 2019‎
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/User:Handroid7/Bbb23&diff=371299399&oldid=371280298

Count Count first commented on meta at 09:11, 21 October 2019‎
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Handroid7&diff=19478701&oldid=19476526
NinjaRobotPirate at 23:56, 23 October 2019‎
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Handroid7&diff=19486884&oldid=19480470

User avatar
Kumioko
Sucks Mod
Posts: 754
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 11:54 pm
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Video parody: Bbb23 power abuse (+ abuse report)

Post by Kumioko » Sun Oct 27, 2019 8:31 pm

Anyone with even half a brain can see that Bbb23 openly and fragrantly violates Wikipedia policy, especially those regarding the use of the Checkwiki tools and my hope is that at some point the WMF or the communities will get their collective heads out of their asses and do something about him. My experience tells me that eventually Bbb23 will get what's coming to him however that same experience also shows that will likely take years and only after an immeasurable amount of damage to the communities in the process.

As for Billinghurst, he isn't an editor he's a politician. He'll tell you one thing and then do the opposite and act like he's doing you the favor. Stating he is an admin on multiple sites doesn't say much because the culture generally shows that if you are an admin on one and run on another site, it will frequently be granted as long as you have some minimal activity on that wiki. This also extends to things like Discord and IRC where admins and functionaries who do absolutely nothing of value for the projects are given absolute authority and control over those editors who are building content and improve the projects.
#BbbGate

User avatar
CMAwatch
Sucks Critic
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2019 1:26 pm
Location: Community Moderation Abuse Watch
Has thanked: 114 times
Been thanked: 32 times

Re: Video parody: Bbb23 power abuse (+ abuse report)

Post by CMAwatch » Sun Oct 27, 2019 9:13 pm

CrowsNest wrote:Fuck me, is this really another Kumioko sock?

Seriously? :roll:

Do you mean me or Handroid7?

He is from Japan (I guess), I am European.
#BbbGate
Weaponizing WP:G5
Oops! Didn't think we'd see? It's right there on WikipediaSucks.co!
ericbarbour wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:22 am
[Wikipedia is] a stupid video game, and the "encyclopedia" is an accidental byproduct.

Post Reply