Help with convincing new user

[Bbb23sucks]

Could you guys give a paragraph or two of text and links to quickly explain to a user how corrupt bbb23 and other admins are?

[ericbarbour]

Could you guys give a paragraph or two of text and links to quickly explain to a user how corrupt bbb23 and other admins are?

I'll give you what's in the book wiki. Links are findable with googling and up to you.

Bbb23

Real-world identity still unknown. Rarely commented on, he is easily one of Wikipedia's worst deletionists. Absolutely no traces of his real personal history have ever been uncovered. Despite having created this account in August 2008, the first visible edit was in January 2009. Large parts of his edit history appear to be missing. Right from the beginning, he fought with others to get things deleted, squabbled over creationism routinely, and did very little content work. He reached adminship in July 2012 despite a long and ugly history of editwarring. "Oppose Bbb23 has a severe case of owning articles. Portillo (talk) 06:32, 16 July 2012 (UTC)" Bbb was deeply involved in the Adnan Oktar editwar, and continues to watchlist the article to insure it remains negative. Like SheffieldSteel above, he is suspected of being a sockpuppet. By 2017 he had blocked more than 20,000 user accounts and deleted more than 20,000 pages.

In April 2014, he blocked an IP address that was making minor, and harmless, changes to biographies, and carefully reverted every one of the changes. It appeared totally pointless.

A personal correspondence on Wikipediocracy with a user called "Mr. Wallace" led to him/her making this interesting set of comments:

"Interesting a user on RationalWiki called Credulous contributed to the Adnan Oktar/Harun Yahya article there and disappeared the day before BBb23 was created on Wikipedia. [59] According to this edit, he had contributed to the SkepticWiki site: [60] The only other person I can think of is Tilman Bayer. He is known to have anti-creationist views and his userpage HaeB was created at roughly the same time as Bbb23 was created." (sic)
Another possibility: a hardened skeptic and geologist from Las Vegas named Tim Hardcastle, who also went by the names "DrAdequate" and "Actualist". [61]Even a photo[62][63][64][65][66] "Interestingly he has since been banned from the internationalskeptics.com forum in early 2010."

I could post the Adnan Oktar article if you need "more".

Wikipedia is heavily censored--to make angry Wikipedians happy.

[wexter]

Bbb23 is an intractable mental midget autistic of epic proportions

My sock puppet, Emilio Mole and his socks, witnessed and confronted the zealotry of this midge-idiot Bbb23

1) A first time thus new editor, a research scientist in academia, decided to rewrite an article about an obscure bug complete with sourcing and references.

2) The "recent edits robot" picked up on the valid edit as possible vandalism (who knows why). But that drew in the administrative flies who talk to each other on discord.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:R ... lversion=2

3) The robot caused a swarming to occur - there are many people waiting to pounce on anything flagged by the computer. Noting is ever read or thought about.. It is a competition to "defend" Wikipedia.

4) Material Scientist reverts the major edit without even examining anything, reading the edit, talking to the new user

5) The new user gets pissed off. "WTF my edit got reversed that I worked a few hours on; did you even read it?; I am a scientist; BTW I was planning to correct two hundred or so bug articles i know are wrong. So I will just revert it back." So now it is edit warring and the big guns are pulled in.

6) That is when our buddy Bbb23 comes into play; all the rules of "Wikipedia" are thrown out the window. Don't attack the new guy, assume good faith. Warn warning warning with no explanations or empathy.

7) Mr bug guy (the new editor) complains that "his edit got deleted within seconds and nobody read it." The guy was pissed off

8) Bbb23 decides to warn Mr. bug guy to sign his posts! He was harassing the piss out of the new guy.

9) Emilio Mole had enough - He went to Bbb23 and basically said "you fucked up" you basically alienated a new user for no reason.. What gives?

10) Bbb23 - never answered - it was crickets.

There was absolutely no accountability or concerns for making a mistake, for breaking the rules, for alienating a new user... crickets.

AS Eric said Bbb23 does not do anything. Bbb23, along with many others consolidate power as to, "Play Emperor" or "Power Ranger." Why does anyone with a real life need to play king on a piss-ant social network?

[ericbarbour]

Why does anyone with a real life need to play king on a piss-ant social network?

Cue the Wikipedia dorks screaming "wikipedia is not a social network!!!"

Liars.

Now you know why I tend to lean toward Tim Hardcastle as Bbb23. I've seen some epic screaming matches featuring Hardcastle under one of his common usernames. He is a total sociopath and anti-religion fanatic and refuses to negotiate a truce or even to talk to the people he tries to destroy. Sounds like Bbb23 to me. Tarantino doesn't agree, but refuses to share what information he has, because he's "saving it" for unspecified "reasons". So your guess is still as good as mine. We might never know for certain.

PS: just discovered someone's been posting my notes on Bbb23 to his talkpages on other language Wikipedias. It gets deleted very quickly, but search engine traces remain. Now THIS is FUNNY.

dradequateonotherWPs.png (79.09 KiB) Viewed 963 times

[Bbb23sucks]

Why does anyone with a real life need to play king on a piss-ant social network?

Cue the Wikipedia dorks screaming "wikipedia is not a social network!!!"

Liars.

Now you know why I tend to lean toward Tim Hardcastle as Bbb23. I've seen some epic screaming matches featuring Hardcastle under one of his common usernames. He is a total sociopath and anti-religion fanatic and refuses to negotiate a truce or even to talk to the people he tries to destroy. Sounds like Bbb23 to me. Tarantino doesn't agree, but refuses to share what information he has, because he's "saving it" for unspecified "reasons". So your guess is still as good as mine. We might never know for certain.

PS: just discovered someone's been posting my notes on Bbb23 to his talkpages on other language Wikipedias. It gets deleted very quickly, but search engine traces remain. Now THIS is FUNNY.
dradequateonotherWPs.png

I am the one who has been posting that.

[Bbb23sucks]

Could you guys give a paragraph or two of text and links to quickly explain to a user how corrupt bbb23 and other admins are?

I'll give you what's in the book wiki. Links are findable with googling and up to you.

Bbb23

Real-world identity still unknown. Rarely commented on, he is easily one of Wikipedia's worst deletionists. Absolutely no traces of his real personal history have ever been uncovered. Despite having created this account in August 2008, the first visible edit was in January 2009. Large parts of his edit history appear to be missing. Right from the beginning, he fought with others to get things deleted, squabbled over creationism routinely, and did very little content work. He reached adminship in July 2012 despite a long and ugly history of editwarring. "Oppose Bbb23 has a severe case of owning articles. Portillo (talk) 06:32, 16 July 2012 (UTC)" Bbb was deeply involved in the Adnan Oktar editwar, and continues to watchlist the article to insure it remains negative. Like SheffieldSteel above, he is suspected of being a sockpuppet. By 2017 he had blocked more than 20,000 user accounts and deleted more than 20,000 pages.

In April 2014, he blocked an IP address that was making minor, and harmless, changes to biographies, and carefully reverted every one of the changes. It appeared totally pointless.

A personal correspondence on Wikipediocracy with a user called "Mr. Wallace" led to him/her making this interesting set of comments:

"Interesting a user on RationalWiki called Credulous contributed to the Adnan Oktar/Harun Yahya article there and disappeared the day before BBb23 was created on Wikipedia. [59] According to this edit, he had contributed to the SkepticWiki site: [60] The only other person I can think of is Tilman Bayer. He is known to have anti-creationist views and his userpage HaeB was created at roughly the same time as Bbb23 was created." (sic)
Another possibility: a hardened skeptic and geologist from Las Vegas named Tim Hardcastle, who also went by the names "DrAdequate" and "Actualist". [61]Even a photo[62][63][64][65][66] "Interestingly he has since been banned from the internationalskeptics.com forum in early 2010."

I could post the Adnan Oktar article if you need "more".

Wikipedia is heavily censored--to make angry Wikipedians happy.

Thanks, but I was looking for a few paragraphs about bbb23 more generally (I would also would like it to have a few external links for further reading). Whence I have the complete text I'll make sure as many users as possible read it and learn the truth

[Bbb23sucks]

Bbb23 is an intractable mental midget autistic of epic proportions

My sock puppet, Emilio Mole and his socks, witnessed and confronted the zealotry of this midge-idiot Bbb23

1) A first time thus new editor, a research scientist in academia, decided to rewrite an article about an obscure bug complete with sourcing and references.

2) The "recent edits robot" picked up on the valid edit as possible vandalism (who knows why). But that drew in the administrative flies who talk to each other on discord.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:R ... lversion=2

3) The robot caused a swarming to occur - there are many people waiting to pounce on anything flagged by the computer. Noting is ever read or thought about.. It is a competition to "defend" Wikipedia.

4) Material Scientist reverts the major edit without even examining anything, reading the edit, talking to the new user

5) The new user gets pissed off. "WTF my edit got reversed that I worked a few hours on; did you even read it?; I am a scientist; BTW I was planning to correct two hundred or so bug articles i know are wrong. So I will just revert it back." So now it is edit warring and the big guns are pulled in.

6) That is when our buddy Bbb23 comes into play; all the rules of "Wikipedia" are thrown out the window. Don't attack the new guy, assume good faith. Warn warning warning with no explanations or empathy.

7) Mr bug guy (the new editor) complains that "his edit got deleted within seconds and nobody read it." The guy was pissed off

8) Bbb23 decides to warn Mr. bug guy to sign his posts! He was harassing the piss out of the new guy.

9) Emilio Mole had enough - He went to Bbb23 and basically said "you fucked up" you basically alienated a new user for no reason.. What gives?

10) Bbb23 - never answered - it was crickets.

There was absolutely no accountability or concerns for making a mistake, for breaking the rules, for alienating a new user... crickets.

AS Eric said Bbb23 does not do anything. Bbb23, along with many others consolidate power as to, "Play Emperor" or "Power Ranger." Why does anyone with a real life need to play king on a piss-ant social network?

Thanks, but I'm not looking for general discussion on Bbb23, just a short guide for users who have no clue about bbb23's, or any other admin's, corruption.

Also, I am currently working on a python bot that will use an advanced technique (not being specific in-case any WP admins are reading) to bypass both the WMF craptchas and the abuse filter. It already bypasses the captchas, but I am still working on the AF.

[Bbb23sucks]

If you’re interested in using my python when it’s done, e-mail <redacted>

[Bbb23sucks]

Why does anyone with a real life need to play king on a piss-ant social network?

Cue the Wikipedia dorks screaming "wikipedia is not a social network!!!"

Liars.

Now you know why I tend to lean toward Tim Hardcastle as Bbb23. I've seen some epic screaming matches featuring Hardcastle under one of his common usernames. He is a total sociopath and anti-religion fanatic and refuses to negotiate a truce or even to talk to the people he tries to destroy. Sounds like Bbb23 to me. Tarantino doesn't agree, but refuses to share what information he has, because he's "saving it" for unspecified "reasons". So your guess is still as good as mine. We might never know for certain.

PS: just discovered someone's been posting my notes on Bbb23 to his talkpages on other language Wikipedias. It gets deleted very quickly, but search engine traces remain. Now THIS is FUNNY.
dradequateonotherWPs.png

I am the one who has been posting that.

Strangely, they removed it on every small wiki but forgot German Wikipedia (archives: archive.org, archive.is)