Koavf is finally banned

[ylevental]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Koavf

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

Good riddance to him and his spammy 2M+ edits. He needed to retire a long time ago tbh.

This is hilarious lmao: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk ... 1017032000

[ericbarbour]

Christ, how predictable. One of their favorite robot boys goes off the rails--again.

Justin has dozens of socks. This will not stop him.

And they can't claim there was no warning........have a nice summary of WP's social dysfunction. Featuring some of its most notorious "administratorthings".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:L ... eventslist

This is the freak he was fighting with. Just as crazy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CloversMallRat

[Strelnikov]

Christ, how predictable. One of their favorite robot boys goes off the rails--again.

Justin has dozens of socks. This will not stop him.

And they can't claim there was no warning........have a nice summary of WP's social dysfunction. Featuring some of its most notorious "administratorthings".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:L ... eventslist

This is the freak he was fighting with. Just as crazy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CloversMallRat

How many editors do they have left that are actually doing anything? Or is it all gnoming 'bots outside of the news stories they turn into articles?

[Archer]

How many editors do they have left that are actually doing anything? Or is it all gnoming 'bots outside of the news stories they turn into articles?

Wikipedia aspires to intellectual vacancy.

[ericbarbour]

How many editors do they have left that are actually doing anything? Or is it all gnoming 'bots outside of the news stories they turn into articles?

No one knows and no one will ever know. I've seen ZERO recent estimates of actual content editing versus "gnoming" and bot edits and administrative jabbering in noticeboards and talkpages. Everything is being nicely covered up today--most of the old statistcs pages have been vanished or discontinued.

[Archer]

How many editors do they have left that are actually doing anything? Or is it all gnoming 'bots outside of the news stories they turn into articles?

No one knows and no one will ever know. I've seen ZERO recent estimates of actual content editing versus "gnoming" and bot edits and administrative jabbering in noticeboards and talkpages. Everything is being nicely covered up today--most of the old statistcs pages have been vanished or discontinued.

I've thought about writing a few scripts to retrieve and compile a dataset to see what interesting patterns I can find using statistical/NLP techniques. It wouldn't be hard at all, there are already python wrappers for the Wikipedia API.

[ericbarbour]

I've thought about writing a few scripts to retrieve and compile a dataset to see what interesting patterns I can find using statistical/NLP techniques. It wouldn't be hard at all, there are already python wrappers for the Wikipedia API.

Please do. Such information could be SOLD to some paid editors, at least those who aren't running their own scripts.

[Strelnikov]

I've thought about writing a few scripts to retrieve and compile a dataset to see what interesting patterns I can find using statistical/NLP techniques. It wouldn't be hard at all, there are already python wrappers for the Wikipedia API.

Please do. Such information could be SOLD to some paid editors, at least those who aren't running their own scripts.

en.Wikipedia has become this wonderland of late-2010s Internet automation to cover for what a ghost town the place really is (on the editor and not the user side). Is Kohs still a paid editor? It would be fun to interview him, get the lowdown on that world.