Wiktionary's "Community" is even worse than Wikipedia

You can talk about anything related to Wikipedia criticism here.
User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4547
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1099 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Re: Wiktionary's "Community" is even worse than Wikipedia

Post by ericbarbour » Tue Mar 21, 2023 12:15 am

And a bonus: Brian Speer, one of the most powerful insiders in Wiktionary history. He has drastically cut back on his work there since 2010, and now just does the minimum to keep his admin and bureaucrat powerz. Sick of the "fun" I guess. "Fun" to him being harassing, bullying, banning and reverting.
Brian Speer

Administrator EncycloPetey. An abusive patroller who is barely known outside the wiki world. Yet another example of a highly educated scientist (in his case, a masters degree in botany) turning a Wikimedia project (in his case, English Wiktionary) into a private playground, and slapping down anyone who disagrees with him. Unlike most abusive admins, he has written a lot of valuable content for Wikipedia, in an obscure scientific area. Not that it helped him.

background

Formerly of UC Berkeley, now a California schoolteacher. Brian authored a large part of UC Berkeley's Museum of Palentology website prior to 1999, according to this. He also dumped a large amount of scientific information onto Geocities pages, all of which are now gone. Obviously Wikipedia was made for him.

WP activity

Showed up October 2005, promptly started writing about plant genera. He likes hornworts.

November 2007 RFA was smooth. His admin activities are fairly typical for Wikipedia, he is not a major banhammer or robotic patroller and has added some good science content to Wikipedia. However, he has a notoriously short temper. [1] [2] [3] [4]

Brian occasionally inserts his own webpages and name into Wikipedia articles as references. [5] He has clearly, repeatedly edited Wikimedia projects during school/work hours.

As mentioned in the Wiktionary article, EncycloPetey is also an admin on Wiktionary since May 2006, a bureaucrat since 2009, and much more abusive there. [6] [7] [8]

Examining his Wiktionary work is impossible, as much of it was oversighted -- in most cases, the only remaining evidence is on en-WP noticeboards. Quote: "From another article's history, EncycloPetey was reverted by a reasonably experienced user with an edit summary and he simply reverted back again without any discussion or anything. Ridiculous."

There are a few examples left in Wiktionary's "Beer Parlour" noticeboard archives.

"EncycloPetey blocked me for three days for cleaning up redirects on two talk pages, with the comment "Disruptive edits: Intentionally changing document content that was decided by vote". This is ridiculous. He also ignored my request on his WP talk page to revert the block. One edit which he reverted was this: [10] Was I being disruptive in removing a circular link that simply brought the reader back to the originating page? Isn't it rather lame for EP to intentionally put such nonsense back in the article, let alone block someone for it? The other was this: [11] Here we had a supposed link to an explanation of the enPR transcription, but the link is simply a redirect to the pronunciation key (AHD, IPA, SAMPA) that the template already linked to. I redirected it to an actual article on the transcription system, the WP page on AHD. (Isn't calling the AHD system "enPR" at best plagiarism anyway?) I could see him reverting me with the explanation that we need a text link to the target of the template, and not leave that to the examples below, in which case I could have reworded the text to say that. But blocking me for three days? There was no warning, no discussion. This was once typical misbehavior for EP, but I'd thought he'd improved recently. What's next, he blocks me because he doesn't like my date format? I'd like to remove the circular link, but he'd probably block me for it again. Can one of you at least take care of this simple and I would think uncontroversial housecleaning task? And what do we do with a sysop who blocks people for trivia? User:Kwamikagami|kwami 09:59, 19 September 2009 (UTC)"

"A couple things. First of all, your edits were not in the right, and EP was correct to revert them. We did have a vote about the name change, and the vote decided enPR. The block was perhaps a bit quicker than I would have done, but looking at your talk page, I imagine it has to do with previous mishaps on your part. You have been talked to about being overly bold with policy page editing (granted this is not a policy page per se, but it's close enough). Concerning enPR vs AHD, I think that most of these ad-hoc pronunciation schemes are all pretty similar, and crying plagiarism is a rather weak assertion, in my opinion. -User:Atelaes 10:13, 19 September 2009 (UTC)"
"Yes, he blocked me almost two years ago for formatting problems that were clearly due to me being a newbie. EP responds to any edits he doesn't like by calling me a "liar" etc. when he obviously knows better (eg linking to diffs that shows he's the one lying). I don't know if this is an emotional problem on his part, but it isn't appropriate behaviour. Are you saying also that it's appropriate for an article to apparently link elsewhere, only to have that link be a redirect back to the originating page? That's improper architecture in any navigation system. User:Kwamikagami 23:47, 19 September 2009 (UTC)"

"I'm confused by your posting. From the title of this section and your tone, I infer that you think it is wrong to be abusive. However, you have posted abuse here and here. Your response to Atelaes also has me confused, since it does not seem to follow thematically from his comments. Could you please explain my "misbehavior" in terms of WT:BLOCK? -- User:EncycloPetey 09:54, 20 September 2009 (UTC)"

"For those who don't want to follow the entire issue, suffice it to note that Kwamikagami's posting to EP's 'pedia talk page reads in part: "Has your medication run out?". IMHO, no other discussion from this user is worthy of attention. (And the underlying issue is long since entirely resolved.) User:Robert Ullmann 10:14, 20 September 2009 (UTC)"

"Agree, not Beer Parlour worthy. User:Mglovesfun 10:20, 20 September 2009 (UTC)"

"It seems we can safely delete WT:VOTE, because when a vote passes, if EncycloPetey doesn't agree with it, he just reverts it. User:Mglovesfun 23:11, 16 May 2010 (UTC)"
"I don't suppose you could've said this any other way. — User:Opiaterein — 23:15, 16 May 2010 (UTC)"

"That's ambiguous. User:Mglovesfun 23:16, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

"I would partially agree with deleting WT:VOTE at the moment. The entire thing has degenerated into the worst kind of political bickering. There are good reasons why wikipedia says !vote. There are also good reasons why we have votes, they are useful, for example, to demonstrate where there is no consensus, and further work is needed. Is the extent of your accusation against EP is only the number/numeral vote? I don't know what exactly the problem is there, but I suspect, like the "UK/US" thingy above, the difference is subtle. The problem with subtle differences is that they really annoy pedants, cf. the greengrocer's apostrophe. User:Conrad.Irwin 23:17, 16 May 2010 (UTC)"

"No, other things, all of the same nature. What's the point then? If consensus doesn't matter, it's each to his own. How can anyone criticize him, me or anyone for just creating or deleting things at will? User:Mglovesfun 23:18, 16 May 2010 (UTC)"

"If I delete his user page, and I have, there's no consensus to do that. But if we disregard consensus, there are no grounds to criticize me other than 'I don't like it because I don't'. User:Mglovesfun 23:19, 16 May 2010 (UTC)"

"Who knows? It's an unsolvable problem, unfortunately. We can hope that each respects the others, but as communities grow, this ceases to be the case. Of course, we could create a police force (or ArbCom if you prefer) that has an (assumed) authority, but it would not solve the problem, merely provide a way of enforcing decisions that some people don't like. User:Conrad.Irwin 23:22, 16 May 2010 (UTC)"

"I don't think EP intends to defend himself. If that were the case, he'd have simply replied instead of reverting my message, which has harsh, yes, but accurate. User:Mglovesfun 23:23, 16 May 2010 (UTC)"

"It's impossible for someone to respond when they've been blocked. You blocked me three times in the span of a few minutes for "Vandalism" (thank you to Daniel and Conrad for unblocking) and then deleted my user page twice. I tried to respond several times, but each time found myself blocked, up against an edit conflict, or distracted by the edit war on my talk page. At this time, I see no point in pursuing the issue (if any). --User:EncycloPetey 23:53, 16 May 2010 (UTC)"

"Like I said on WT:RFDO, I accused him of POV pushing and regretted it. I turned out to be right the first time, and it's horrible that I was right, because it leaves us in this situation. While I hate conflict, I don't like to turn into a 'doormat' either. User:Mglovesfun 23:25, 16 May 2010 (UTC)"

"I should hope he doesn't; that would give you both a chance to have an exciting fight. By remaining non-confrontational, we can hope to engage in more fruitful discourse. User:Conrad.Irwin 23:27, 16 May 2010 (UTC)"

"On voting, not on EncycloPetey: Voting is a good thing. Voting in English Wiktionary has not degenerated at all; by contrast, we are learning how to do it. People are learning how to formulate policies and how to criticize them. People are learning how to express disagreement. Disagreement, dubbed above as bickering, is typical for open systems for collective decision making, as opposed to autocratic, oligocratic and dictatorial ones. --User:Dan Polansky 08:36, 17 May 2010 (UTC)"

Also: [13] There are very few other examples like this remaining in keyword searches of the "Beer hall" archives. They tend to be buried in threads involving various disputes.

According to this, Brian has considerable control over Wiktionary's "Word Of The Day" selection process for their front page feature, effectively making him the Mark Pellegrini of Wiktionary.

Speer was finally dragged to arbitration on en-WP in August 2012 by Lukas Pietsch, over some obscure disagreement.[14] Speer's tendency to revert and block with no explanation or discussion came back to haunt him. Arbcom ordered his desysopping on 7 September. He continued to be a powerful figure on Wiktionary, unaffected by his Wiki-Punishment.

Speer can also be found occasionally on Wikisource (where he is still an administrator] and a few other minor projects. Usually haranging people.

User avatar
Bbb23sucks
Sucker
Posts: 1337
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2023 9:08 am
Location: The Astral Plane
Has thanked: 1255 times
Been thanked: 263 times

Re: Wiktionary's "Community" is even worse than Wikipedia

Post by Bbb23sucks » Tue Mar 21, 2023 12:47 am

ericbarbour wrote:
Tue Mar 21, 2023 12:15 am
And a bonus: Brian Speer, one of the most powerful insiders in Wiktionary history. He has drastically cut back on his work there since 2010, and now just does the minimum to keep his admin and bureaucrat powerz. Sick of the "fun" I guess. "Fun" to him being harassing, bullying, banning and reverting. (snipped for length)
Thanks! I have a very long post planned for tomorrow about some major drama on a non-WMF wiki site.
"Globally banned" since September 5, 2023 for exposing harassment.

Email: wikipediasucks@disroot.org

Petition to ban Bbb23Wikipedia AlternativeDonate to help French strikers

User avatar
wexter
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 574
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2020 4:18 pm
Has thanked: 274 times
Been thanked: 279 times

Re: Wiktionary's "Community" is even worse than Wikipedia

Post by wexter » Tue Mar 21, 2023 1:04 am

English Wikipedia is the nexus of it all.. with an eye to "taking over open-source world one Wiki at a time."
When "Wiki" was a new "technology" it was most likely seen as a platform that could be applied to everything.
I think we should go further still and shoot for the ultimate goal of creating “Wikimedia”. That's media with an “m”. It would use Wiki-style rules to enable public participation in the creation and editing of all kinds of media: encyclopedias and other reference works, current news, books, fiction, music, video etc. Like current broadcast media, it would have differentiated “channels” and “programs”, each with self-selecting audiences. Unlike current media, however, the audience would also be actively involved in creating its own programming, instead of merely passively watching it. Sheldon Rampton:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheldon_Rampton
Image

I looked at Wikivoyage which is a great idea, but it is an editorial ghost town with obsolete articles.
Chatgpt is giving personalized, up to date, and more complete suggestions..

Wiki is a legacy technology - the open source idea as applied in Wikimedia is toxic and embarrassing


PS :besides being a former NYS web designer (employee) Rampton (the brainchild who coined wikimedia - wiki's will be the modern Gutenberg press) has written a few "vanity-press political-books" in neutral point of view - no political bias need apply
Banana Republicans: How the Right Wing is Turning America Into a One-Party State Paperback – May 24, 2004
by Sheldon Rampton (Author), John Stauber (Author) 00The best-selling authors of Weapons of Mass Deception examine the right-wing conspiracy that is sweeping America, explaining how the Republican party and its mouthpieces in lobbying groups, the legal system, and the media are undermining dissent and destroying American pluralistic politics. Original. 40,000 first printing.
Wikipedia - "Barely competent and paranoid. There’s a hell of a combination."

User avatar
Bbb23sucks
Sucker
Posts: 1337
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2023 9:08 am
Location: The Astral Plane
Has thanked: 1255 times
Been thanked: 263 times

Unbelievable hostility on Wiktionary

Post by Bbb23sucks » Tue Jun 27, 2023 9:06 pm

Look at this (archive). A user lists a page for deletion. Another user then suggests redirecting to a more common synonym (as you would assume by global policy, enwiki policy, or just common sense). This user is met with a "correction" by an admin:
No, that goes entirely against our redirect policy. Please familiarize yourself with it before advising that. Equinox
So the user reasonable asks why:
Any redirects I have done (not many) have not been reverted, so I was unaware of any redirect policy. You will find zillions of them in Wikipedia (and I did have one reverted here). Please provide the evidence. DonnanZ
And is met by this HIGHLY uncivil response:
I don't care what you've done. We have a policy, formed by consensus, and you either obey it or get fixed later and/or kicked out. Do you also go to the law courts of England and Wales and say "loads of people commit mugging so I did it too, Your Honour". You fucking clown. Stay off RFV and RFD pages please. Equinox
This isn't some exception, Equinox pulls this stuff daily. This wouldn't even fly on enwiki. Why do they even keep him as an admin? He even knows this himself. From his userpage:
On Wiktionary: I am the enfant terrible. Nobody wants me but I'm really useful.
----

Another example:

Someone pointed out his extreme incivility on his talk page (diff), and Equinox responded by deleting the section with the edit summary "fuck off you absolute cunt and die in a fire".

Image

UNBELIEVABLE. YOU CAN'T EVEN MAKE THIS STUFF UP. :flamingbanana: And this is just what he does publicly. Imagine what he does in private.

----

For more examples of Equinox's extreme hostility, just look at this edit summary search. I'm sure you can find plenty.


https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?t ... d=14194653
Last edited by Bbb23sucks on Wed Jun 28, 2023 4:52 am, edited 3 times in total.
"Globally banned" since September 5, 2023 for exposing harassment.

Email: wikipediasucks@disroot.org

Petition to ban Bbb23Wikipedia AlternativeDonate to help French strikers

User avatar
boredbird
Sucks Mod
Posts: 500
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 3:24 am
Has thanked: 635 times
Been thanked: 286 times

Re: Unbelievable hostility on Wiktionary

Post by boredbird » Wed Jun 28, 2023 1:22 am

Bbb23sucks wrote:
Tue Jun 27, 2023 9:06 pm
And this is just what he does publicly. Imagine what he does in private.
Probably he's a lot more polite because he can't call himself "Equinox".

User avatar
Bbb23sucks
Sucker
Posts: 1337
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2023 9:08 am
Location: The Astral Plane
Has thanked: 1255 times
Been thanked: 263 times

Re: Unbelievable hostility on Wiktionary

Post by Bbb23sucks » Wed Jun 28, 2023 1:25 am

boredbird wrote:
Wed Jun 28, 2023 1:22 am
Bbb23sucks wrote:
Tue Jun 27, 2023 9:06 pm
And this is just what he does publicly. Imagine what he does in private.
Probably he's a lot more polite because he can't call himself "Equinox".
I mean by email, not in real life.

Btw: There was also another (now deleted) diff where he called another editor a f**got while reverting their question.
"Globally banned" since September 5, 2023 for exposing harassment.

Email: wikipediasucks@disroot.org

Petition to ban Bbb23Wikipedia AlternativeDonate to help French strikers

User avatar
Boink Boink
Sucks Fan
Posts: 137
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2023 8:50 pm
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Wiktionary's "Community" is even worse than Wikipedia

Post by Boink Boink » Wed Jun 28, 2023 10:45 pm

Lest we forget, English Wikipedia is no example to the less civilised hinterlands of the Wikimedia galaxy.

"Fuck off" is not actionable on en.wiki under any circumstances. This is completely settled policy.

Reporting that you were called an "absolute cunt" puts you into a lottery where there is a good chance the responding en.wiki Administrator will be minded to tell you to just ignore it and go find something else to do.

As for "die in a fire", that would probably be quite easily dismissed as hyperbole, making it even less offensive than "absolute cunt" and so even more likely to attract a "yeah, that's bad, but do we really need to take action here?" type of response from wiki-officialdom.

User avatar
Bbb23sucks
Sucker
Posts: 1337
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2023 9:08 am
Location: The Astral Plane
Has thanked: 1255 times
Been thanked: 263 times

Apparently THIS is acceptable behavior for a Wiktionary admin...

Post by Bbb23sucks » Mon Jul 03, 2023 6:45 am

https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?t ... d=34229813 (archive)
Equinox wrote: please just fucking die. botwork is not important or important. please suck up your cancer. everyone hates you, fuckwit. just die. kk???? i never want to see you again
"Globally banned" since September 5, 2023 for exposing harassment.

Email: wikipediasucks@disroot.org

Petition to ban Bbb23Wikipedia AlternativeDonate to help French strikers

User avatar
rubricatedseedpod
Sucks
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2023 6:56 pm
Location: The Jungle of Views
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: Apparently THIS is acceptable behavior for a Wiktionary admin...

Post by rubricatedseedpod » Mon Jul 03, 2023 6:15 pm

Bbb23sucks wrote:
Mon Jul 03, 2023 6:45 am
https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?t ... d=34229813 (archive)
Equinox wrote: please just fucking die. botwork is not important or important. please suck up your cancer. everyone hates you, fuckwit. just die. kk???? i never want to see you again
There's apparently some crazy history to this:

Code: Select all

I used to rule the words
Sysop the first time, second and third
Now in the morning I edit alone
Sweep the entries I used to pwn

When I was admin thrice
Feel the fear in the vandals' eyes
Listen to my audios sing
Now the sock-king is dead!
Long live the king!

One minute I closed RFD
Next the RFDs closed on me
And I discovered that my reputation stands
Upon pillars of salt and pillars of sands

I hear of animals from DCDuring
Module wizardry from Benwing
Be my mirror, my sword and shield
My Wiktionary's in a foreign field

For some reason I can't explain
I know Donnanz will quote from RAIL
Adminship time the third
That was when I ruled the words

It was a wicked and wild sin
To go rouge and let vandals back in
IP blocks and the sound of drums
People couldn't believe what I'd become

Bureaucrats wait
For my head on a silver plate
Just a puppet on a lonely string
Oh, who would ever want to be king?

Sgconlaw is WOTDing
Romanophile is still editing
Be my mirror, my sword and shield
My Wiktionary's in a foreign field

For some reason I can't explain
AryamanA tracked my usernames
Adminship time the third
That was when I ruled the words

Hear Polansky's rants and raving
Equinox's drunken entries saving
Be my mirror, my sword and shield
My Wiktionary's in a foreign field

For some reason I can't explain
I know I still want to delete the main
Adminship time the third
That was when I ruled the words
Last edited by Bbb23sucks on Mon Jul 03, 2023 7:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Hide tag isn't enabled
Editing Wikipedia is not a substitute for being a person.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4547
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1099 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Re: Wiktionary's "Community" is even worse than Wikipedia

Post by ericbarbour » Mon Jul 03, 2023 8:06 pm

I'm starting to wonder if Equinox is a sockpuppet belonging to Brian Speer. They act in a very similar manner--pedantic, rigid and abusive. And because this was Equinox's first edit on en-Wiktionary:
https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?t ... id=5187658

It looks as if EncycloPetey is the longest lasting bastard-admin I've ever seen. As of today he continues to grind Wiktionary content several times a week, maintains admin and bureaucrat rights, and has been active since October 2005 (and his history is badly shredded so there is probably something missing). EIGHTEEN YEARS. And it's been ELEVEN YEARS since he was desysopped on en-WP, where he is also still grinding minor content edits. I went back thru his recent history--it appears he's given up on the insults and fighting with people on talkpages and noticeboards. No doubt warnings were given and he backed down. Even more reason to run an abusive sockpuppet on the side.

WMF projects are lands of insane pedantry. It is their main reason for existing, and not for "bringing free knowledge to everyone". If there was a trophy for being the "most pedantic", Mr. Speer would have to be a finalist at very least.

Post Reply