That if you are a Wikipedia editor who deliberately and repeatedly violates BLP, if you are experienced enough to know better, if when challenged you don't immediately admit your error and instead offer a variety of implausible explanations, arrogant bluster and general cluelessness, you are in deep shit.
Andy will come for you, and he will destroy you.
Presumably because he has a care for the potential victims of Wikipedia, and a sincere belief that the effective and timely enforcement of BLP is a means to achieve that.
Yeah, OK.
While the crimes may not be comparable, when it comes to the manner in which Jess Wade edits, her attitude to policy and to other editors, she is guilty as charged. Regular and repeated violations of BLP, and all the bluster, bullshit and defiance when called out on it.
What did Andy do when this was brought to his attention at Wikipediocracy?
Fuck all.
He didn't stand up for BLP, he instead became the magical White Knight of Princess Wade.
Well, fuck him, and the unicorn he rode in on.
I hate people like that. People who think they can bullshit their way through anything, and so openly disrespect people who have done their research and presented their findings clearly, and have yet to be shown how they are wrong on the facts by anyone.
If you think I have no case, say it. Prove it. Be the man of facts and reason you seemed to want to be in that incident, and face me down. Line by line, point by point. Passionate, but factual.
Because I fucking remember what you did on Wikipediocracy, instead of that.
When the only thing you can probably say on this showing in Jess Wade's defence is, well, at least she isn't calling someone a criminal in the first line of a BLP to take advantage of Google juice in an apparent polical smear job, then you don't really have a case. That sort of thing is near the top end of violations, but it isn't the floor.
If you don't want to believe Jess Wade is the sort of person who might do that, that is your right. She's had great press, after all.
But if I show you she is pretty darn close to that sort of person at times, if I show you when she has used Wikipedia to advance dubious claims and take advantage of Google, all for reasons that are entirely against the ethos of Wikipedia, and you still deny it, I will remember that shit.
If you only needed to see what she was like in a quick random search, and when you saw no obvious issues you concluded this was a harassment campaign or worse, I will remember that shit.
Jess Wade is cleverer than you dopey cunts by half. She knows how to make her work look superficially compliant. She knows that burying her more severe fuck ups among a daily stream of only mildly problematic work is sufficient to fly under the radar, becuas surprise surprise, yes, Wikipedia is twenty years old, and it still can't even identify a serious problem like SecretName101 without the bloke self incriminating.
So you better wake up and smell what it means when you're being told Jess Wade is a fucking fraud of an editor, the exact sort of person who would be caught if Wikipedia was capable of enforcing BLP not just in this shit show way, but effectively.
She's high on the list of people who would be caught in a theoretically well run Wikipedia that is mindful and proactive when it comes to BLP.
Because, while it wasn't typical, it was inevitable and preventable, you go ask Katie Bouman if it was any fun being at the wrong end of Jess Wade's idea of a sound and ethical application of BLP. You ask her if she feels like the editor who lit her up and doggedly fought to have her biography retained to make some wider point, was any fun.
That's the real Jess Wade.
She'll do harm using Wikipedia if she wants. If you let her.
She knows how to do it, and how to get away with it.
That's the mark of true disregard. Contempt even.
It says a lot that an editor with the media profile of Jess Wade, some who has CALLED HERSELF AN AMBASSADOR of Wikipedia no less, thinking her work is that good apparently, would have to be as bad as this random fuckstick, before you even noticed.
You mocked SecretName101 for claiming he is a top editor. Well, and I fuckin bet you didn't know this, because you're an ignorant asswipe, no word of a lie, Jess Wade believed she was good enough to be an Administrator a long time ago, and the only reason she hasn't applied, is because sexism.
She would be destroyed at RfA. And rightly so. That it would come as a complete shock to her that she really is that bad, is the fault of people like you. Your expectations are so fucking low, it is unreal.
And you can only FUCKING DREAM of Jess Wade being as willing to explain herself as poor old SecretName101 when dragged in for interrogation. And she would have fucking exploded under even a tenth of that level of scrutiny, calling you all the names under the sun.
But of course you wouldn't even get the chance to wait around at AN/I and see what she had had say for herself so you could start dismantling it for plausibility, let alone start wondering if she is waiting it out.
She has full, complete, immunity. In no small part thanks to Wikipediocracy, of that I have no doubt.
I detailed only last night, a clear cut case of SYNTH, with the apparent intent to shame someone who wasn't even the article subject, for comments they made in 2005. It fits her long standing agenda, the one she wants Google juice to help expose. Men are bad, women are heroes. Read about it here, as a result of my own in depth personal research that goes far beyond anything sources are doing, because sexism. And she can hardly deny it has more than a whiff of self interest in it.
That's the sort of shit you find on a random check, her latest article at the time, if you do actually check. Not look, check.
Fuck you if you think that's minor, or raises no BLP red flags.
Fuck you if you think thst having ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY these days that every single Wikipedia biography posted by Jess Wade will have large chunks of it lacking a source, and knowing she doesn't give a flying fuck and indeed knows she doesn't need to because of wankers like you, isn't a BLP problem.
Her latest biography....
.....unsourced.She was awarded a Medical Research Council Research Fellowship to work on Genetic Epidemiology. She was part of the Wellcome Centre for Human Genetics in genetic epidemiology. During this fellowship she earned an additional Master's degree in genetic epidemiology at the Erasmus University Rotterdam. She completed research projects at the Queensland Institute of Technology and University of Pittsburgh.
Stand up and be counted Andy, you fucking hero.
BLP/N awaits your report, Krina Zondervan needs someone to speak for her right to expect a BLP compliant biography straight out the box when it's coming from such supposedly experienced and media lauded editor, not simply when someone gets around to noticing and caring enough.
Because you better fucking believe I've been tracking how long BLP issues like this go unfixed on Wikipedia, perhaps precisely because they have the veneer of being a Jess Wade article. Pretty surprising how much damage one person can do at at this rate, when nobody cares to ensure that Wikipedia's celebrity editors are actually minimally competent in how they document people with little to no public profile before Jess Wade lights them up on Wikipedia.
You care, right?
Yeah, I didn't think so.
Perhaps his real issue, as he hinted at on Wikipediocracy at the time, is with Wikipedia's policy of allowing anonymous editing. Perhaps he imagines "Jess Wade" is more entitled to a presumption of competence or a sense of responsibility than "SecretName101". Fool.
They had to look pretty fucking hard it seems, to identify multiple problematic articles from SecretName101. You don't even need more than a week's worth of BLPs by Jess Wade, to make the case she is a serial and serious offender. And she has written over a thousand.
I'm taking fucking names.
Fucking amateurs.