There's been a bit of speculation as to the nature of the long-deleted Slimv account.
As I mentioned last week, I have several database dumps, which I've been painstakingly reviewing in search of insights on this and the many other odd deletions made by Musical Linguist in early June of 2006.
Trust me when I say: there is some wild stuff in there.
Wild.
The main SlimVirgin content you'll have to wait for, but Slimv I shall share with you now.
It would appear that Slimv made a single edit in her career, logged November 5, 2004 to the article on Mordacai Vanunu, the guy who revealed the existence of Israel's nuclear weapons program in the mid-80s.
When Vanunu squealed, he was smart enough to do so from England, but that didn't stop the Mossad from capturing and imprisoning him in Israel for 18 years.
Slimv's contribution to the article provided some very unique insights into the role Sunday Mirror owner Robert Maxwell might have had in revealing Vanunu's treason.
Though it's been deleted, you can still see the substance of Slimv's addition by looking at the diffs that previously surrounded it.
When you do, ignore every thing above Line 15, as this is the edit that followed Slimv's. The changes you see below Line 15 were made by Slimv.
Remember, Musical Linguist said that deletion was a result of personally identifying information included in the edit. Either that's the case, or it's not. If it is: whoa. If it's not: whoa.
It's also worth noting that Musical Linguist deleted at least one edit from the Robert Maxwell article at the same time she was deleting the Vanunu edit and Slimv's user page.
One more thing.
Six days after Slimv made her one and only edit, followed a few hours later by SlimVirgin's inaugural contribution, two things happened: Mordacai Vanunu was re-arrested, and Yasser Arafat assumed room temperature. That was a busy week for Israeli intelligence.
Full Version: One SlimVirgin question answered
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Sat 4th August 2007, 7:04am) 
Six days after Slimv made her one and only edit, followed a few hours later by SlimVirgin's inaugural contribution, two things happened: Mordacai Vanunu was re-arrested, and Yasser Arafat assumed room temperature. That was a busy week for Israeli intelligence.
Very interesting. However, if she's an agent, she's a very sloppy agent. That's what bugs me the most. Is intelligence in the hands of people this incompetent, or does she just have access to this kind of information through other channels?
Good find!
QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Sat 4th August 2007, 9:15am)
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Sat 4th August 2007, 7:04am)
Six days after Slimv made her one and only edit, followed a few hours later by SlimVirgin's inaugural contribution, two things happened: Mordacai Vanunu was re-arrested, and Yasser Arafat assumed room temperature. That was a busy week for Israeli intelligence.
Very interesting. However, if she's an agent, she's a very sloppy agent. That's what bugs me the most. Is intelligence in the hands of people this incompetent, or does she just have access to this kind of information through other channels?
Good find!
Surely the latter.
Although then again, there is a precedent for sloppy agents recruited from Kings
So hang on. Is SlimVirgin this person?:
On [[September 30]], [[1986]], an American Mossad agent, [[Cheryl Bentov]], operating under the name of "Cindy" and masquerading as an American tourist, began an affair with Vanunu
American Mossad agent Cherly Bentov?
That doesn't add up to me.
Of course, how did SlimV know this information? It is pretty specialised.
Even though all that SlimV changed in that was that Cherly Bentov had had an affair with Vanunu rather than persuading him (which in itself sounds VERY James Bond like), it is still interesting.
Was this information released to the public? Is she making it up? Or is it information that only someone in the intelligence industry would know?
QUOTE
On [[September 30]], [[1986]], an American Mossad agent, [[Cheryl Bentov]], operating under the name of "Cindy" and masquerading as an American tourist, began an affair with Vanunu
American Mossad agent Cherly Bentov?
That doesn't add up to me.
Of course, how did SlimV know this information? It is pretty specialised.
Even though all that SlimV changed in that was that Cherly Bentov had had an affair with Vanunu rather than persuading him (which in itself sounds VERY James Bond like), it is still interesting.
Was this information released to the public? Is she making it up? Or is it information that only someone in the intelligence industry would know?
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sat 4th August 2007, 12:03pm)
So hang on. Is SlimVirgin this person?:
QUOTE
On [[September 30]], [[1986]], an American Mossad agent, [[Cheryl Bentov]], operating under the name of "Cindy" and masquerading as an American tourist, began an affair with Vanunu
American Mossad agent Cherly Bentov?
That doesn't add up to me.
Of course, how did SlimV know this information? It is pretty specialised.
Even though all that SlimV changed in that was that Cherly Bentov had had an affair with Vanunu rather than persuading him (which in itself sounds VERY James Bond like), it is still interesting.
Was this information released to the public? Is she making it up? Or is it information that only someone in the intelligence industry would know?
Slimmy isn't that person. And come on... how else do you "persuade" someone who knows that Mossad are after him to leave the country?
I added this to our blog page "comprehensive coverage of the slimvirgin scandal".
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sat 4th August 2007, 11:03am)
Of course, how did SlimV know this information? It is pretty specialised.
Simplest answer is that she was a journalist, and probably has/had friends who also were journalists.
By the way, this was not the only contribution by User:Slimv. There were others which were deleted earlier. You've gotta use an earlier dump to see them.
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sat 4th August 2007, 7:03am)
So hang on. Is SlimVirgin this person?:
QUOTE
On [[September 30]], [[1986]], an American Mossad agent, [[Cheryl Bentov]], operating under the name of "Cindy" and masquerading as an American tourist, began an affair with Vanunu
That doesn't add up to me.
If, as I suspect, Linda Mack is not Cheryl Bentov, then there's no personal information in that edit and Musical Linguist lied when deleting it; in which case: whoa.
"Vanunu, immediately upon his release from prison in April 2004, said that he did not believe "Cindy" was a Mossad agent: 'She was either an FBI or a CIA agent. I spent a week with her. I saw her picture. Cindy was a young woman from Philadelphia.'"
Well, SlimVirgin has referred to herself in the past as:
- Candi
- Slim
- Sarah
One of the edits that was oversighted was one in which she signed her name as "Candi". However, we believe that this is in reference to "The SlimVirgin" (that Indonesian thing) and is of no consequence to her true identity at all. The importance of that oversighted edit was that it was a request to the administrator's noticeboard to have someone banned for bullying her over editing to the Lockerbie bombing article. The reality was that the person who was "bullying her" had been editing it for a year before SlimVirgin got there, and had protested that she was changing fact in to fiction (his edits were oversighted too). The "privacy" aspect was that SlimVirgin had played the victim from day 1, and had pretended to be the victim when she was in fact the culprit, and used this to get another user banned. Actually, he was only threatened to be banned, then he quit. That edit was oversighted too. And the admin she complained to is no longer involved in the project. I can't remember his name either.
The only "privacy" element of it was that we had discussed it here on Wikipedia Review (I know because I was the one who started the topic) and that we were able to prove that SlimVirgin was changing history in a significant way, and that she was never a genuine editor, not from day one.
There was nothing personal in any of the edits. They were oversighted to hide evidence of abuse.
Selina kept a copy, she said. I don't know where she kept a copy. Perhaps in the end she forgot to press save. We have to wait until Selina comes back from holidays to see them.
- Candi
- Slim
- Sarah
One of the edits that was oversighted was one in which she signed her name as "Candi". However, we believe that this is in reference to "The SlimVirgin" (that Indonesian thing) and is of no consequence to her true identity at all. The importance of that oversighted edit was that it was a request to the administrator's noticeboard to have someone banned for bullying her over editing to the Lockerbie bombing article. The reality was that the person who was "bullying her" had been editing it for a year before SlimVirgin got there, and had protested that she was changing fact in to fiction (his edits were oversighted too). The "privacy" aspect was that SlimVirgin had played the victim from day 1, and had pretended to be the victim when she was in fact the culprit, and used this to get another user banned. Actually, he was only threatened to be banned, then he quit. That edit was oversighted too. And the admin she complained to is no longer involved in the project. I can't remember his name either.
The only "privacy" element of it was that we had discussed it here on Wikipedia Review (I know because I was the one who started the topic) and that we were able to prove that SlimVirgin was changing history in a significant way, and that she was never a genuine editor, not from day one.
There was nothing personal in any of the edits. They were oversighted to hide evidence of abuse.
Selina kept a copy, she said. I don't know where she kept a copy. Perhaps in the end she forgot to press save. We have to wait until Selina comes back from holidays to see them.
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Sat 4th August 2007, 8:45am)
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sat 4th August 2007, 7:03am)
So hang on. Is SlimVirgin this person?:
QUOTE
On [[September 30]], [[1986]], an American Mossad agent, [[Cheryl Bentov]], operating under the name of "Cindy" and masquerading as an American tourist, began an affair with Vanunu
That doesn't add up to me.
If, as I suspect, Linda Mack is not Cheryl Bentov, then there's no personal information in that edit and Musical Linguist lied when deleting it; in which case: whoa.
Identifying information might mean that Sv was among a small group of people who had access to the information and not that she is named in the content. Maybe Slimv was a "recreational" player at WP, perhaps not even fully aware of the "akashic" nature of a wiki. It might be from understanding the mistake that she also realized the potential. This does not mean she was a spy or not at that time. Only that for whatever reason a very disciplined and sophisticated POV pusher was born.
From what we can tell, the only reason that the edits of SlimV were oversighted were to eliminate any accusations that SlimVirgin had a sock puppet.
I do not think that there were any controversial or wrong reasons behind SlimV's edits being oversighted. I think that they were quite legitimate.
The edits made by SlimVirgin on the Lockerbie bombing article, and the associated edits that she made to the administrator's noticeboard and to user talk pages in relation to this, her first ever edits to Wikipedia, ARE a serious issue. They don't disclose her true identity at all, but they do clearly demonstrate her agenda, and why she was at Wikipedia. It clearly demonstrates that from day one she intended to add factually incorrect information to Wikipedia, and to do it by playing damsel in distress and manipulating people to her own ends. She did this from day one. That is the so-called "private information" that was oversighted.
The only question is - what was the significance of what she changed? To understand that, we need to have an expert on the Lockerbie bombing look at the oversighted edits. This is something that we have yet to have happen. This is why we need someone like Ludwig, who wrote the Ohmy News article, and is an expert on the Lockerbie bombing, look at the oversighted edits. Hopefully Selina has them on file, or alternatively WordBomb or someone else can figure out what they were, and then when we can get an expert to come around and look at them, then he can figure out precisely what was changed, and what it means.
I suspect that it was just as significant as the truth-changing on the PA article, which I can tell very easily because I am an expert on the topic. What we need here is an expert.
I do not think that there were any controversial or wrong reasons behind SlimV's edits being oversighted. I think that they were quite legitimate.
The edits made by SlimVirgin on the Lockerbie bombing article, and the associated edits that she made to the administrator's noticeboard and to user talk pages in relation to this, her first ever edits to Wikipedia, ARE a serious issue. They don't disclose her true identity at all, but they do clearly demonstrate her agenda, and why she was at Wikipedia. It clearly demonstrates that from day one she intended to add factually incorrect information to Wikipedia, and to do it by playing damsel in distress and manipulating people to her own ends. She did this from day one. That is the so-called "private information" that was oversighted.
The only question is - what was the significance of what she changed? To understand that, we need to have an expert on the Lockerbie bombing look at the oversighted edits. This is something that we have yet to have happen. This is why we need someone like Ludwig, who wrote the Ohmy News article, and is an expert on the Lockerbie bombing, look at the oversighted edits. Hopefully Selina has them on file, or alternatively WordBomb or someone else can figure out what they were, and then when we can get an expert to come around and look at them, then he can figure out precisely what was changed, and what it means.
I suspect that it was just as significant as the truth-changing on the PA article, which I can tell very easily because I am an expert on the topic. What we need here is an expert.
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sat 4th August 2007, 1:03pm)
Was this information released to the public? Is she making it up? Or is it information that only someone in the intelligence industry would know?
It was more than public. F.e. German Newspage April 2004
Welcome, Herr Hagenstroem.
QUOTE
Sp?ñter recherchierten Journalisten, da?ƒ ihr Klarname Cheryl Bentov lautet. Sie stammt aus der nordisraelischen Stadt Naunya und ist mit einem Major der Abwehr verheiratet. Heute lebt sie unter dem Namen Cheryl Goodman in den USA.
QUOTE(h.hagenstroem @ Sat 4th August 2007, 2:59pm)
It was more than public. F.e. German Newspage April 2004
This at-times-funny (especially if read in the voice of Buffalo Bill in Silence of the Lambs) Babelfish translation of the relevant section should help:
QUOTE
"Cindy"
Further searches led finally to the reconstruction of a drama of terror, between at the end of of Septembers and Anfang October 1986 took place and each Polit-thriller? la James bond and John le Carré in the shade places.
"Motta", how friends called the good-looking and strong 32jaehrigen Mordechai, made a road acquaintance first pleasing for it with a walk in the Londoner town center. "Cindy" was called the picture-pretty blond American, who zollte after own representation on European route Merry old England tribute. It was love - or more exactly said impulses - at first sight, which inflamed the passionate young man. He had come three weeks before from Australia into the metropolis of the Commonwealth, in order here its exposures over top secret Israeli nuclear weapon production held to publish. As the Sunday Times determined later, he had been advised the English secret service by its Australian sister organization.
"Motta" purged anyhow to the Sexappeal, which the grazioese and kaprizioese "Cindy" radiated. Therefore it was not surprised, when it suggested to it flying with it to Rome where it wanted to fulfill all in the Appartment of its travelled sister its desires. Hand in hand they flew from Heathrow to the Leonardo there Vinci Airport. On shortest way a taxi brought the pair into the desired nest, a house at the edge to the eternal city. But the allegedly storm-free Bude was already taken and occupied - of a special command of the Mossad. Two of the agents overwhelmed Vanunu with ether and "Cindy" gave it an injection with Betaeubungsmittel.
The ohnmaechtige victim was put in chains, packed into a transportation crate and on an orange steamer driving under Israeli flag to ship. Before he came again correctly to itself, he already was in Tel Aviv. After its bad awaking it experienced that it concerned with "Cindy" a Geheimagentin of the Mossad. Later journalists investigated that its clear name Cheryl Bentov reads. It originates from the northIsraeli city Naunya and is married with a major of the defense. Today it lives under the name Cheryl Goodman in the USA.
It puts lotion on its body!
Further searches led finally to the reconstruction of a drama of terror, between at the end of of Septembers and Anfang October 1986 took place and each Polit-thriller? la James bond and John le Carré in the shade places.
"Motta", how friends called the good-looking and strong 32jaehrigen Mordechai, made a road acquaintance first pleasing for it with a walk in the Londoner town center. "Cindy" was called the picture-pretty blond American, who zollte after own representation on European route Merry old England tribute. It was love - or more exactly said impulses - at first sight, which inflamed the passionate young man. He had come three weeks before from Australia into the metropolis of the Commonwealth, in order here its exposures over top secret Israeli nuclear weapon production held to publish. As the Sunday Times determined later, he had been advised the English secret service by its Australian sister organization.
"Motta" purged anyhow to the Sexappeal, which the grazioese and kaprizioese "Cindy" radiated. Therefore it was not surprised, when it suggested to it flying with it to Rome where it wanted to fulfill all in the Appartment of its travelled sister its desires. Hand in hand they flew from Heathrow to the Leonardo there Vinci Airport. On shortest way a taxi brought the pair into the desired nest, a house at the edge to the eternal city. But the allegedly storm-free Bude was already taken and occupied - of a special command of the Mossad. Two of the agents overwhelmed Vanunu with ether and "Cindy" gave it an injection with Betaeubungsmittel.
The ohnmaechtige victim was put in chains, packed into a transportation crate and on an orange steamer driving under Israeli flag to ship. Before he came again correctly to itself, he already was in Tel Aviv. After its bad awaking it experienced that it concerned with "Cindy" a Geheimagentin of the Mossad. Later journalists investigated that its clear name Cheryl Bentov reads. It originates from the northIsraeli city Naunya and is married with a major of the defense. Today it lives under the name Cheryl Goodman in the USA.
This is interesting information. 
what do some here think about the writing style? on first reading it did not remind me much of SlimVirgin's writing style. Maybe she added it quickly.
what do some here think about the writing style? on first reading it did not remind me much of SlimVirgin's writing style. Maybe she added it quickly.
Please nobody interpret the following as my placing undue importance on Cheryl Bentov herself. This is just one of those repeating themes one sees when analyzing the edit patterns of SlimVirgin and Jayjg.
First, revisit the diff that came just before and after SlimV's oversighted edit, only this time, ignore what appears below Line 15.
The anon IP changed the word "kidnapped" to "captured," in reference to Mordacai Vanunu. That IP locates to Montreal, Canada, and had six additional edits in its history, on the topics of Palestine, Yasser Arafat and Israel (and as pro-Israel as I am, I can't help but feel more than a bit uncomfortable with the rather rigid anti-Arab bias manifest in these edits).
As I've stated in the past, I happen to hail from the "Jayjg lives in Toronto" camp, as opposed to my "Jayjg
NY" counterparts.
Now take a gander at the Wikipedia article on Cheryl Bentov; specifically, look at the only contribution to the article made by Jayjg. It reverts an edit changing the word "captured" to "abducted," in reference to Mordacai Vanunu.
Now, back to Mordacai Vanunu. As you'll recall, he was re-arrested on November 11, 2004. Three days later, an edit war erupted between editors Xed and Deuxmachina. Their differences were substantial, but one recurring theme was Xed's insistence on saying Vanunu was originally "kidnapped," and Deuxmachina insisting he was "arrested."
That edit war grew quite heated, until Jayjg arrived (unrequested and, amazingly, just two minutes after Deuxmachina put the article in precisely the shape he wanted) and protected.
Deuxmachina never returned, while Xed's block log leading up to his eventual banning is a Wikipedia who's who list. The coup de grace, by the way, was administered by Jimbo himself.
The timing of this flurry of edits one week prior to the re-arrest of Vanunu is intriguing, especially when considering how many people -- journalists included -- likely googled the guy's name when they heard about his re-arrest, and how his article would frame the debate for them.
First, revisit the diff that came just before and after SlimV's oversighted edit, only this time, ignore what appears below Line 15.
The anon IP changed the word "kidnapped" to "captured," in reference to Mordacai Vanunu. That IP locates to Montreal, Canada, and had six additional edits in its history, on the topics of Palestine, Yasser Arafat and Israel (and as pro-Israel as I am, I can't help but feel more than a bit uncomfortable with the rather rigid anti-Arab bias manifest in these edits).
As I've stated in the past, I happen to hail from the "Jayjg lives in Toronto" camp, as opposed to my "Jayjg
NY" counterparts.Now take a gander at the Wikipedia article on Cheryl Bentov; specifically, look at the only contribution to the article made by Jayjg. It reverts an edit changing the word "captured" to "abducted," in reference to Mordacai Vanunu.
Now, back to Mordacai Vanunu. As you'll recall, he was re-arrested on November 11, 2004. Three days later, an edit war erupted between editors Xed and Deuxmachina. Their differences were substantial, but one recurring theme was Xed's insistence on saying Vanunu was originally "kidnapped," and Deuxmachina insisting he was "arrested."
That edit war grew quite heated, until Jayjg arrived (unrequested and, amazingly, just two minutes after Deuxmachina put the article in precisely the shape he wanted) and protected.
Deuxmachina never returned, while Xed's block log leading up to his eventual banning is a Wikipedia who's who list. The coup de grace, by the way, was administered by Jimbo himself.
The timing of this flurry of edits one week prior to the re-arrest of Vanunu is intriguing, especially when considering how many people -- journalists included -- likely googled the guy's name when they heard about his re-arrest, and how his article would frame the debate for them.
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Sat 4th August 2007, 10:53pm)
The timing of this flurry of edits one week prior to the re-arrest of Vanunu is intriguing, especially when considering how many people -- journalists included -- likely googled the guy's name when they heard about his re-arrest, and how his article would frame the debate for them.
The obvious question that springs to mind: How clear would it be for a mere "interested MOP" to know that Vanunu was going to be re-arrested?
QUOTE(Unrepentant Vandal @ Sat 4th August 2007, 6:28pm)
The obvious question that springs to mind: How clear would it be for a mere "interested MOP" to know that Vanunu was going to be re-arrested?
This gets to the obvious question of: "Why would the Mossad care about Wikipedia?"As I recall, Arafat was at Death's door for about a week there toward the end. Timing the arrest to take place just hours after Arafat kicked it (a time when Muslims can always be counted on to create great video footage) suggests an awareness of the potential for serious PR blowback (and indeed, the International Federation of Journalists had some harsh words for the Israeli government).
In answer to your question, I think the timing of the sudden and fairly focused interest in an otherwise sparsely edited article is somewhat suggestive of the editors being directed in their work, just as Vanunu's arresting officers clearly were in theirs.
Then again, Israel has a long history of just doing what it needs to in order to survive, perceptions be damned. I'm far from convinced, but do find it an interesting subject to consider.
And, for the record, I'm amazed they didn't just have Vanunu shot. That guy's a traitor, imho.
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Sun 5th August 2007, 12:03am)
And, for the record, I'm amazed they didn't just have Vanunu shot. That guy's a traitor, imho.
Just shows how Israel is more civilised than many other countries. They've only ever executed one person, Adolf Eichmann, a mass murderer.
QUOTE(guy @ Sat 4th August 2007, 8:38pm)
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Sun 5th August 2007, 12:03am)
And, for the record, I'm amazed they didn't just have Vanunu shot. That guy's a traitor, imho.
Just shows how Israel is more civilised than many other countries. They've only ever executed one person, Adolf Eichmann, a mass murderer.
QUOTE
This was a similar tactic to that used by Mossad when arresting Adolf Eichmann.
For some reason, Deuxmachina (probably a Jayjg sock) felt it was important to strike a comparison between those two.
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Sat 4th August 2007, 6:14pm)
For some reason, Deuxmachina (probably a Jayjg sock) felt it was important to strike a comparison between those two.
How many socks does Jayjg have? What are they?
QUOTE(anthony @ Sat 4th August 2007, 10:29am)
By the way, this was not the only contribution by User:Slimv. There were others which were deleted earlier. You've gotta use an earlier dump to see them.
Turns out you're right, Anthony. I've just found found edits by SlimV to the Pierre Salinger article. I'm coming up with a better mode of presentation for these, but until then, here's a full paragraph she added at 2004-11-02T00:27:19ZQUOTE
One year later, after being approached by a conman, Salinger went on air for ABC with a story blaming PA 103 on a CIA drugs-smuggling operation that went wrong, in which terrorists inserted a bomb into a suitcase on a CIA protected drugs-route. He also arranged for the conman, who had offered no evidence to support his claims, to be paid for the story, thereby going against ABC News policy that sources must not be paid. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) set up an inquiry into Salinger's claims but found them to be without merit.
Not very encyclopedic, is it?On 2004-11-02T00:42:22Z she added this:
QUOTE
After the August 1990 invasion of Kuwait by Iraq, Salinger got a scoop by obtaining a transcript in Arabic of a conversation between Saddam Hussein and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie, in which Glaspie famously told Saddam: "We have no opinion on Arab-Arab border disputes," thereby apparently giving Saddam the green light to invade Kuwait. Shortly after that conversation, Saddam did precisely that. Salinger brought the transcript back to London amid great excitement, ordering an Arab translator and London researcher to sit through the night translating it into passable English. But ABC wasn't sure whether to air the transcript immediately or hold it back for a few days for a big invasion special they were producing. Salinger was furious at the suggestion of delay. To show ABC who was boss, he leaked the transcript to Hella Pick of the British newspaper, the Guardian, thereby ensuring that ABC would have to run with it that day.
After reading that garbage prose, I'm tempted to question whether SlimV is SlimVirgin at all.More is on the way.
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Sun 5th August 2007, 4:13am)
After reading that garbage prose, I'm tempted to question whether SlimV is SlimVirgin at all.
That's my first thought. It doesn't read like her at all. Either she was editing quickly and didn't proofread herself or it's not her.
If she claims it to be hers and those are her edits...then that's very interesting. That would make me think there is more than one person behind "SlimVirgin" and I've never thought that.
QUOTE(guy @ Sun 5th August 2007, 1:38am)
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Sun 5th August 2007, 12:03am)
And, for the record, I'm amazed they didn't just have Vanunu shot. That guy's a traitor, imho.
Just shows how Israel is more civilised than many other countries. They've only ever executed one person, Adolf Eichmann, a mass murderer.
Most civilised countries carry out ethnic cleansing and are based on the supremacy of people of one religion?
Perhaps SlimV is not SlimVirgin at all, but is the person who wrote the cross-dressing smoking thing, who just happens to have one similar interest? Or that SlimV is another person entirely? Maybe that was why they deleted SlimV - not because it was a sock puppet, but because it was an entirely different person. Or alternatively that it was SlimVirgin, but it was more open and honest than SlimVirgin is normally.
And I think that this suggests that there was nothing personal in the deleted edits. It was just demonstrating the agenda of the people involved.
Anyway keep going. I don't really know about this whole topic and am nowhere near an expert on it. You guys seem to know a lot more about it than I do.
Oh and as for "why would Mossad care about Wikipedia?" give me strength. Since the world wide web came out in the early 1990s police have used the internet to catch certain illegal activities, and secret services have been trying to control as much as they can, ESPECIALLY chat sites and information sites. The fact that Wikipedia is both makes it even more important.
The reality is that most likely agents from every secret agency in the world are probably using Wikipedia as a major part of their intelligence operations, and are involved in many edit wars to try to spread lies and deceit to the masses. I doubt that they use Wikipedia greatly to find information, but I can bet that they do use it to try to outdo each other in the spread of disinformation. This is only logical. However, they would be using it to find certain types of information, such as looking at people who would have made certain types of suspicious edits.
Quite seriously, we had German secret service (I can't remember what their name is) on our talker for heaven's sakes. A talker! I mean how unimportant is a talker? But I would be a little surprised if there were secret service on Wikipedia Review, because this is a critic site. Actually, we had German and US secret service. Never caught any British, or any Australian.
And I think that this suggests that there was nothing personal in the deleted edits. It was just demonstrating the agenda of the people involved.
Anyway keep going. I don't really know about this whole topic and am nowhere near an expert on it. You guys seem to know a lot more about it than I do.
Oh and as for "why would Mossad care about Wikipedia?" give me strength. Since the world wide web came out in the early 1990s police have used the internet to catch certain illegal activities, and secret services have been trying to control as much as they can, ESPECIALLY chat sites and information sites. The fact that Wikipedia is both makes it even more important.
The reality is that most likely agents from every secret agency in the world are probably using Wikipedia as a major part of their intelligence operations, and are involved in many edit wars to try to spread lies and deceit to the masses. I doubt that they use Wikipedia greatly to find information, but I can bet that they do use it to try to outdo each other in the spread of disinformation. This is only logical. However, they would be using it to find certain types of information, such as looking at people who would have made certain types of suspicious edits.
Quite seriously, we had German secret service (I can't remember what their name is) on our talker for heaven's sakes. A talker! I mean how unimportant is a talker? But I would be a little surprised if there were secret service on Wikipedia Review, because this is a critic site. Actually, we had German and US secret service. Never caught any British, or any Australian.
Logically, it seems almost inconceivable it could be a different person. Probably she just improved at Wikipedia writing as time passed, and that's why it seems careless by comparison.
QUOTE(everyking @ Sun 5th August 2007, 7:16pm)
Logically, it seems almost inconceivable it could be a different person. Probably she just improved at Wikipedia writing as time passed, and that's why it seems careless by comparison.
Well, I think that SlimV who wrote the smoking stories was certainly a different person, and we all know that Linda Mack and Linda Mack Schloff are different people, so why not? Because they edited the same articles?
But I did read it in a few places that SlimVirgin admitted that that was her.
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sun 5th August 2007, 10:30am)
QUOTE(everyking @ Sun 5th August 2007, 7:16pm)
Logically, it seems almost inconceivable it could be a different person. Probably she just improved at Wikipedia writing as time passed, and that's why it seems careless by comparison.
Well, I think that SlimV who wrote the smoking stories was certainly a different person, and we all know that Linda Mack and Linda Mack Schloff are different people, so why not? Because they edited the same articles?
But I did read it in a few places that SlimVirgin admitted that that was her.
It is impossible that SlimV was not SlimVirgin and I really don't why anyone is even suggesting it.
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sun 5th August 2007, 9:34am)
The reality is that most likely agents from every secret agency in the world are probably using Wikipedia as a major part of their intelligence operations, and are involved in many edit wars to try to spread lies and deceit to the masses. I doubt that they use Wikipedia greatly to find information, but I can bet that they do use it to try to outdo each other in the spread of disinformation. This is only logical. However, they would be using it to find certain types of information, such as looking at people who would have made certain types of suspicious edits.
I think you overestimate the importance of Wikipedia. If the security services are involved with Wikipedia, it won't be in the editing of it.
QUOTE(Unrepentant Vandal @ Mon 6th August 2007, 1:07am)
I think you overestimate the importance of Wikipedia. If the security services are involved with Wikipedia, it won't be in the editing of it.
I think you're naive if you think that. Think about what they are all about, what their jobs are, and how it applies to Wikipedia.
Would they be looking for terrorists on Wikipedia? By oath they would be. They'd be looking like hawks on all of the terrorism related articles, to see who might be a terrorist, or working against their interests - looking at the editors, and trying to figure out who they are if they have suspicions.
Would they be looking for spies from other agencies? By oath they would be. Anyone who suddenly has information about topics that they shouldn't have information on, they'd be following what they say, to see if they can get secrets from them.
Would they be trying to spread false information? By oath they would be. If someone is trying to print accurate information that their government doesn't want people to know, they'd be trying their level best to get rid of it. If they could, they'd be trying to add even more disinformation to articles of importance to their government.
Is SlimVirgin a government agent? She acts like one. She edits all of the right articles. In fact, other than her occasional dabble in animal rights, pretty much all of her edits are in relation to things that a secret agent would be interested in. And, unlike people like MONGO, SPUI and Morton Devonshire, who also edit those kinds of articles, she also changes the policy to suit what she is adding, deletes revision histories, and tries to hide what she is doing.
Now, if you were a secret service, and you saw the power of SlimVirgin, you'd hire her and get her to work for you, to use Wikipedia to your ends. It'd be invaluable.
However, as we've demonstrated quite clearly, she was doing this from the very beginning, in other words all of her editing was with this agenda. There was no starting time when she was just a normal everyday person and then went along one particular path. No, from the very beginning she was like this.
So perhaps, in theory, SlimVirgin to begin with was just an ordinary person who *ACTED LIKE A SECRET AGENT* in her use of Wikipedia. Indeed, it is hypothetically possible (if that was our only evidence) that she has remained neutral. However, CIA etc would be fools not to hire her. They'd have a bidding war over her, especially with her power, and her ability to get rid of it. And if she turned them down, my goodness why did she do that? I don't see her writing about having ethical problems with the secret service, or anything like that.
She edits for 15 hours per day, constant editing. To suggest that she does this just for fun, with these kinds of topics, or that she does it while at work, casually when the boss isn't watching is a bit strange. If she is unemployed, how does she know as much as she does about these kinds of topics?
QUOTE(Unrepentant Vandal @ Sun 5th August 2007, 10:37am)
I think you overestimate the importance of Wikipedia. If the security services are involved with Wikipedia, it won't be in the editing of it.
Wikipedia's supporters and critics alike have a tendency to overestimate its importance and take things regarding it overly seriously, I think.
QUOTE(dtobias @ Mon 6th August 2007, 2:44am)
QUOTE(Unrepentant Vandal @ Sun 5th August 2007, 10:37am)
I think you overestimate the importance of Wikipedia. If the security services are involved with Wikipedia, it won't be in the editing of it.
Wikipedia's supporters and critics alike have a tendency to overestimate its importance and take things regarding it overly seriously, I think.
*sighs*
Is Wikipedia important? Is it any more important than the mud I play, or the online game, or the PC game? Is it any more important than the blog that I write in or the chat programs that I use? Or the chat programs that you use?
If I go along to play Sloth Mud III and try to explain it to people, they don't care all that much, its a mud. I try to explain to them about MK, and they don't care all that much, its a game. I try to explain to them HOMM and they might think its a cool game, and one of the best games ever made, and even educational, but in the end its just a game. I show them my blog, and yeah its nice I've got a blog, so does everyone else. ICQ and all of the others are great ways to talk to people, so what everyone else has them. And everyone uses Wikipedia. Everyone knows what it is. Any time you go to google to search for anything, people know its there. My 90-something year old grandmother who barely knows how to use a computer knows what Wikipedia is. She doesn't quite understand what it is, but she understands that its an encyclopedia online. I have tried to explain to her the difference between that and Britannica, or New World Encyclopedia, and she thinks that the only difference is that it's written on a computer. But even still she does have some idea.
Now, if we can reduce Wikipedia's importance to equal that of Sloth Mud III or Metal Knights, or Heroes of Might and Magic, then great that'd be wonderful. If everyone used it as hey a fun thing to use and of no real importance then that'd be fantastic. Then we could just have this web site for bitching and not consider that there is anything important to it. It could be a banned user's forum, for us to moan about how unfair our bans were, and about why admins are so unfair, and leave it at that, not ever get in to any deeper issues beyond that, just say that Wikipedia sucks and that's about it.
But the problem is that a lot of people give it too much importance. We have it being used in supreme court cases. Now, in saying that, LiveJournal and Blogger and MySpace are used in supreme court cases too, but in the case of blogs they are used as evidence of wrongdoing. They use Wikipedia to try to prove that things are true, or not true. Lawyers use Wikipedia information as references of past cases, and print them out for a jury to read.
Teachers print out Wikipedia articles and hand them to students for information on a topic (I caught one teacher using an article that I had written, and I was the only person to have contributed any information to it!) Students get given research assignments and simply go to Wikipedia, print out the topic, change a few words, then put their name to it, and use the sources that Wikipedia used, to plagiarise Wikipedia - except that its not plagiarism since its released under GDFL - legally they are allowed to do that. Other students use individual Wikipedia articles in their list of references "My project on Cuba. References: Wikipedia article on Cuba, Wikipedia article on Bay of Pigs, Wikipedia article on Cuban cigar". News reporters use Wikipedia not just to refer to Wikipedia laughs, but as a serious resource.
My giving it importance doesn't affect whether or not it is important. The reality is that Wikipedia is important. Not just because of its web ranking (which is about number 5 I think), but because of how much it is used, and how many people use it.
Would the CIA infiltrate Britannica? Absolutely, if they could. I am sure that they write to encyclopedias every so often demanding retractions on certain information. And I am sure that every so often they make these retractions. But the problem is that there are laws that prevent them from doing much more than that. Britannica is safe from such invasions.
Does the CIA infiltrate press? Of course they do. On certain "sensitive" issues, the CIA basically controls what the press writes, by controlling the information that is made available. Anyone bother to follow the Iraq war, especially the one involving Kuwait? It took one hell of a lot of effort on a global scale before we were allowed any kind of real freedom of press, and even now there's still a lot of problems with it.
So why are people thinking that they aren't involved in Wikipedia? It's rather naive I think.
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sun 5th August 2007, 4:55pm)
QUOTE(Unrepentant Vandal @ Mon 6th August 2007, 1:07am)
I think you overestimate the importance of Wikipedia. If the security services are involved with Wikipedia, it won't be in the editing of it.
I think you're naive if you think that. Think about what they are all about, what their jobs are, and how it applies to Wikipedia.
Would they be looking for terrorists on Wikipedia? By oath they would be. They'd be looking like hawks on all of the terrorism related articles, to see who might be a terrorist, or working against their interests - looking at the editors, and trying to figure out who they are if they have suspicions.
Granted. But resources are finite, and there are websites far more appealing to terrorists.
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sun 5th August 2007, 4:55pm)
Would they be looking for spies from other agencies? By oath they would be. Anyone who suddenly has information about topics that they shouldn't have information on, they'd be following what they say, to see if they can get secrets from them.
Would they be trying to spread false information? By oath they would be. If someone is trying to print accurate information that their government doesn't want people to know, they'd be trying their level best to get rid of it. If they could, they'd be trying to add even more disinformation to articles of importance to their government.
Would they be trying to spread false information? By oath they would be. If someone is trying to print accurate information that their government doesn't want people to know, they'd be trying their level best to get rid of it. If they could, they'd be trying to add even more disinformation to articles of importance to their government.
There are much easier, and more effective, ways of doing both of the above. I would be disappointed if what you mention hadn't been considered, but it will have almost certainly have been quickly dismissed.
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sun 5th August 2007, 4:55pm)
Is SlimVirgin a government agent? She acts like one. She edits all of the right articles. In fact, other than her occasional dabble in animal rights, pretty much all of her edits are in relation to things that a secret agent would be interested in. And, unlike people like MONGO, SPUI and Morton Devonshire, who also edit those kinds of articles, she also changes the policy to suit what she is adding, deletes revision histories, and tries to hide what she is doing.
Now, if you were a secret service, and you saw the power of SlimVirgin, you'd hire her and get her to work for you, to use Wikipedia to your ends. It'd be invaluable.
Now, if you were a secret service, and you saw the power of SlimVirgin, you'd hire her and get her to work for you, to use Wikipedia to your ends. It'd be invaluable.
No you wouldn't. If what Mr. Bryne says about SlimVirgin (and her mental health) at King's is true, then the security services would not touch her with a bage pole.
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sun 5th August 2007, 4:55pm)
However, as we've demonstrated quite clearly, she was doing this from the very beginning, in other words all of her editing was with this agenda. There was no starting time when she was just a normal everyday person and then went along one particular path. No, from the very beginning she was like this.
I think it's reasonable to suspect that SV has an agenda, even if said agenda is simply to argue forcefully for her (somewhat extremist, particualarly with regard to animal rights) views.
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sun 5th August 2007, 4:55pm)
So perhaps, in theory, SlimVirgin to begin with was just an ordinary person who *ACTED LIKE A SECRET AGENT* in her use of Wikipedia. Indeed, it is hypothetically possible (if that was our only evidence) that she has remained neutral. However, CIA etc would be fools not to hire her. They'd have a bidding war over her, especially with her power, and her ability to get rid of it. And if she turned them down, my goodness why did she do that? I don't see her writing about having ethical problems with the secret service, or anything like that.
Not going to happen.
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sun 5th August 2007, 4:55pm)
She edits for 15 hours per day, constant editing. To suggest that she does this just for fun, with these kinds of topics, or that she does it while at work, casually when the boss isn't watching is a bit strange. If she is unemployed, how does she know as much as she does about these kinds of topics?
Wikipedia is addictive. Power is fun. Humans seek respect. I don't know enough about Linda Mack to speculate any further, but I believe that the truth will turn out to be mundane.
As a Cantabrigian myself, I can easily state that if she came close to completing a philospohy Phd at King's, then the law of averages means she will have been acquainted with people who are now agents. Again though, the chances of them supplying her with information, while non-zero, is negligible.
Considered analysis, on the other hand, would be relatively likely if they kept in touch...
QUOTE(Unrepentant Vandal @ Sun 5th August 2007, 4:46pm)
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sun 5th August 2007, 4:55pm)
Now, if you were a secret service, and you saw the power of SlimVirgin, you'd hire her and get her to work for you, to use Wikipedia to your ends. It'd be invaluable.
No you wouldn't. If what Mr. Bryne says about SlimVirgin (and her mental health) at King's is true, then the security services would not touch her with a bage pole.
I tend to agree, but what strikes me about that story is the part about her changing accents suddenly one day. That's a useful skill for covert operations, if not a taught one. Byrne might easily have been misinterpreting the rest. In fact, by the time Byrne met Linda it might have already all been an act.
Actually, if you allow yourself to consider the possibility that Linda was already a covert agent at the time of her encounter with Bryne, all kinds of conspiracy theories enter into play. I don't want to go there. The mind can come up with incredible possibilities if it's allowed to run free.
As far as SlimVirgin currently being an agent, I think the chances are pretty much nil. As for her past, I could easily argue either way. As a former investigative reporter who worked for Pierre Salinger, she's going to have access to a lot of non-public information anyway, and we *know* that much is true.
QUOTE(everyking @ Sun 5th August 2007, 8:46am)
Logically, it seems almost inconceivable it could be a different person. Probably she just improved at Wikipedia writing as time passed, and that's why it seems careless by comparison.
That could be, and people definitely do get better at writing with practice. Disregarding the evidence that points to her being a journalist at one time (ie looking at this objectively, ignoring prior evidence), her writing reads like a person who not only enjoys writing, but has done it very much during her life, perhaps as a profession. One theory may be that the Slimv edits were written to appear like a person who is not like this.
She is probably the best writer I have seen on Wikipedia, although a few others like Mangoe are right up there, I really can't think of a better one...
I've never seen SV write prose like this on a bad day. I am speculating that she was a journalist and on a bad day her prose was not like that. Perhaps when she made those edits, she had not written previously for a long time, but I still do not think her writing would be quite that bad. These Slimv edits are simply shocking, in more ways than one.
Off topic: My short theory that may go along with the theme of this thread is this is that Slim was nothing more than a journalist, with a lot of contacts. Some of these have been intelligence agents (or she at least thought they were) and she got caught up in that. She ended up pushing their agenda and maybe did a few things a journalist should not do. I think that situation exists today, under different circumstances of course.
In essence, I believe her to be nothing more than a former "wannabe" intelligence agent. I won't go any deeper than that, and this may be written too vague, but I don't want to detract from WordBomb's thread.
QUOTE(BobbyBombastic @ Sun 5th August 2007, 7:39pm)
Off topic: My short theory that may go along with the theme of this thread is this is that Slim was nothing more than a journalist, with a lot of contacts. Some of these have been intelligence agents (or she at least thought they were) and she got caught up in that. She ended up pushing their agenda and maybe did a few things a journalist should not do. I think that situation exists today, under different circumstances of course.
In essence, I believe her to be nothing more than a former "wannabe" intelligence agent. I won't go any deeper than that, and this may be written too vague, but I don't want to detract from WordBomb's thread.
This is a possibility.
(BTW, for all we know other edits were oversighted, not just Slim's, right? So the crap writing could have been put there by someone else.)
Anthony: If she had been selected as an agent, then she wouldn't draw attention to herself by such eccentric behaviour.
QUOTE(Unrepentant Vandal @ Sun 5th August 2007, 8:37pm)
BTW, for all we know other edits were oversighted, not just Slim's, right? So the crap writing could have been put there by someone else.)
Only one edit was deleted and/or oversighted between those two, edit #7171501:
*7118630, 0, 217.132.32.3, 20041029213204, Mordechai_Vanunu, /* Release restrictions */ Interviews after the release; Asylum application rejected by Sweden
*7171501, 127201, Slimv, 20041105060805, Mordechai_Vanunu, /* Abduction */ allegation of Robert Maxwell involvement
*7231987, 0, 24.37.240.230, 20041106231911, Mordechai_Vanunu,
QUOTE(Unrepentant Vandal @ Sun 5th August 2007, 8:37pm)
Anthony: If she had been selected as an agent, then she wouldn't draw attention to herself by such eccentric behaviour.
Hmm, considering the "eccentric behaviour":
*We had been sitting on a bench in the afternoon, talking, then I said something that I thought innocuous, and she responded, "Patrick (dramatic pause) I'm so hurt that you said that."
*In a student pub in which kids wore jeans and tee shirts, she wore flowing, ruby red and emerald green dresses that were more costumes than attire.
*I popped the fry into my mouth and smiled at her in an attempt to show friendliness, but instead she threw her face down in her hands.
*After Julian’s death, she wore long black gowns.
*She came to the King's Bar dressed like a Goth, and was always crying in public. After Lockerbie she was a wreck, but she was a wreck before it as well.
I guess you make a valid point.
QUOTE(Unrepentant Vandal @ Sun 5th August 2007, 4:37pm)
Anthony: If she had been selected as an agent, then she wouldn't draw attention to herself by such eccentric behaviour.
Of course it could be that she is indeed an intel officer, but for some backward former Soviet republic...like maybe Ukraine...and she is the best they can afford, or she's the niece of some corrupt minister of something or other.
QUOTE(Unrepentant Vandal @ Sun 5th August 2007, 9:37pm)
QUOTE(BobbyBombastic @ Sun 5th August 2007, 7:39pm)
Off topic: My short theory that may go along with the theme of this thread is this is that Slim was nothing more than a journalist, with a lot of contacts. Some of these have been intelligence agents (or she at least thought they were) and she got caught up in that. She ended up pushing their agenda and maybe did a few things a journalist should not do. I think that situation exists today, under different circumstances of course.
In essence, I believe her to be nothing more than a former "wannabe" intelligence agent. I won't go any deeper than that, and this may be written too vague, but I don't want to detract from WordBomb's thread.
This is a possibility.
(BTW, for all we know other edits were oversighted, not just Slim's, right? So the crap writing could have been put there by someone else.)
Anthony: If she had been selected as an agent, then she wouldn't draw attention to herself by such eccentric behaviour.
The writing wasn't put there by someone else as I saw all her edits before they were oversighted. I'm not sure why people are so sure in dismissing SV as an agent when at least 2 if not 3 people have said that she was an agent.
QUOTE(jorge @ Sun 5th August 2007, 4:45pm)
The writing wasn't put there by someone else as I saw all her edits before they were oversighted. I'm not sure why people are so sure in dismissing SV as an agent when at least 2 if not 3 people have said that she was an agent.
Hmmm.... To be strictly accurate, I don't think most people are completely dismissing the idea that she might have been (or is) an "agent," or whatever you want to call it. (I sort of like "unwitting dupe," myself...)
The problem is that it's next to impossible to prove, so it's safer/nicer/preferable to avoid referring to it as a likely possibility. The more conspiratorially-minded of our members can draw their own conclusions, of course.
Having said all that, foreign journalists are approached (and fed information of varying levels of dubiousness) by intelligence types all the time, with and without their knowing it. That just seems much more likely to me, assuming there was any spook involvement at all.
QUOTE(Somey @ Sun 5th August 2007, 11:08pm)
QUOTE(jorge @ Sun 5th August 2007, 4:45pm)
The writing wasn't put there by someone else as I saw all her edits before they were oversighted. I'm not sure why people are so sure in dismissing SV as an agent when at least 2 if not 3 people have said that she was an agent.
Hmmm.... To be strictly accurate, I don't think most people are completely dismissing the idea that she might have been (or is) an "agent," or whatever you want to call it. (I sort of like "unwitting dupe," myself...)
The problem is that it's next to impossible to prove, so it's safer/nicer/preferable to avoid referring to it as a likely possibility. The more conspiratorially-minded of our members can draw their own conclusions, of course.
Having said all that, foreign journalists are approached (and fed information of varying levels of dubiousness) by intelligence types all the time, with and without their knowing it. That just seems much more likely to me, assuming there was any spook involvement at all.
I think people's perceptions have been distorted a little in that in Daniel's summing up of what is known about SV he forgot to mention that two or three people had identified SV as an agent.
QUOTE(jorge @ Sun 5th August 2007, 10:10pm)
I think people's perceptions have been distorted a little in that in Daniel's summing up of what is known about SV he forgot to mention that two or three people had identified SV as an agent.
What are the details? Salinger said he thought it. Michael Morris named her. Anything else?
QUOTE(anthony @ Sun 5th August 2007, 11:21pm)
QUOTE(jorge @ Sun 5th August 2007, 10:10pm)
I think people's perceptions have been distorted a little in that in Daniel's summing up of what is known about SV he forgot to mention that two or three people had identified SV as an agent.
What are the details? Salinger said he thought it. Michael Morris named her. Anything else?
Wasn't there someone called Cooley???
QUOTE(jorge @ Sun 5th August 2007, 10:37pm)
QUOTE(anthony @ Sun 5th August 2007, 11:21pm)
QUOTE(jorge @ Sun 5th August 2007, 10:10pm)
I think people's perceptions have been distorted a little in that in Daniel's summing up of what is known about SV he forgot to mention that two or three people had identified SV as an agent.
What are the details? Salinger said he thought it. Michael Morris named her. Anything else?
Wasn't there someone called Cooley???
Cooley was the source for the Salinger statement.
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sun 5th August 2007, 9:34am)
The reality is that most likely agents from every secret agency in the world are probably using Wikipedia as a major part of their intelligence operations, and are involved in many edit wars to try to spread lies and deceit to the masses.
If there are "secret agents" from around the world using Wikipedia, they have spectacularly failed to make any lasting impression on content. I am confident to near certainty that there are no US agents making significant edits on-site for example. Alarm bells become very finely tuned after a while, and you'd know if someone was an agent. Believe me, you'd know. There are several shadier US government figures who've obviously either edited their own low profile biogs, or have had others edit it for them to erase some of the more uncomfortable episodes, but they've had trouble in the process. Much of this goes uncommented on.
There are certainly a number of obvious propagandists, campaigners and so on, who edit prolifically on WP. The Tamil rape victims category was a good example. But even they struggle to make stuff stick, due in large part to the transparent process. If even the most uncontroversial subjects like Mike Scott find it hard to edit their own bios without getting in a mess, then the campaigners tend to hit brick walls just as fast.
To reiterate points made elsewhere, SV and Jayjg are almost certainly not editing for any reason other than that they are addicted to the process, becoming exponentially and now pathologically protective over subjects they are passionate about. This is very common on WP.
QUOTE(Kato @ Sun 5th August 2007, 6:41pm)
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sun 5th August 2007, 9:34am)
The reality is that most likely agents from every secret agency in the world are probably using Wikipedia as a major part of their intelligence operations, and are involved in many edit wars to try to spread lies and deceit to the masses.
If there are "secret agents" from around the world using Wikipedia, they have spectacularly failed to make any lasting impression on content. I am confident to near certainty that there are no US agents making significant edits on-site for example. Alarm bells become very finely tuned after a while, and you'd know if someone was an agent. Believe me, you'd know. There are several shadier US government figures who've obviously either edited their own low profile biogs, or have had others edit it for them to erase some of the more uncomfortable episodes, but they've had trouble in the process. Much of this goes uncommented on.
There are certainly a number of obvious propagandists, campaigners and so on, who edit prolifically on WP. The Tamil rape victims category was a good example. But even they struggle to make stuff stick, due in large part to the transparent process. If even the most uncontroversial subjects like Mike Scott find it hard to edit their own bios without getting in a mess, then the campaigners tend to hit brick walls just as fast.
To reiterate points made elsewhere, SV and Jayjg are almost certainly not editing for any reason other than that they are addicted to the process, becoming exponentially and now pathologically protective over subjects they are passionate about. This is very common on WP.
Not an actual intelligence agent, but some sort of minor asset. I'm not an expert on the intelligence community but based on some vaguely analogous experience (foundation program officers) I think it might work like this: An agent runs multiple projects. The projects are staffed by assets. In this case it may be a team of editors, or perhaps simply a "pilot" in which a single asset works to build alliances and relationships with other uninformed and basically innocent editors. If LM had prior intelligence handlers she might have become enamored of WP independently and offered her services in the capacity of demonstrating what an intelligence asset can accomplish on WP. I think the signature of such a project would look much like the SlimVirgin/Jayjg axis. I'm not saying I know this. It needs to be ruled out.
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Mon 6th August 2007, 2:00am)
If LM had prior intelligence handlers she might have become enamored of WP independently and offered her services in the capacity of demonstrating what an intelligence asset can accomplish on WP. I think the signature of such a project would look much like the SlimVirgin/Jayjg axis. I'm not saying I know this. It needs to be ruled out.
Thing is, what have SV and Jayjg accomplished on WP? SV has bits here and there on political subjects, much of it to do with animal rights, but is nowhere compared to the big politics hitters on WP. Even Chip Berlet can get edited into submission by some of the hardcore obsessives. Most of SV's worst antics are off main article space, on the rfc's, the policy pages, the ANI board, the community issues. Her impact on article content is overrated. Jayjg's ongoing laborious - at times comic - campaign of damage limitation regarding Israel smacks of an obsessive amateur rather than a professional mind.
The pair of them are too sloppy, too fallible, and have stuck their necks out way too far to be considered intelligence assets to anyone. Despite SV's dalliances during the Lockerbie affair, which stemmed from personal involvement, her involvement in WP almost certainly comes from current addiction to the website. Based on the evidence I've seen, I've ruled out any more sinister motives until something new turns up.
QUOTE(Kato @ Sun 5th August 2007, 7:26pm)
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Mon 6th August 2007, 2:00am)
If LM had prior intelligence handlers she might have become enamored of WP independently and offered her services in the capacity of demonstrating what an intelligence asset can accomplish on WP. I think the signature of such a project would look much like the SlimVirgin/Jayjg axis. I'm not saying I know this. It needs to be ruled out.
Thing is, what have SV and Jayjg accomplished on WP? SV has bits here and there on political subjects, much of it to do with animal rights, but is nowhere compared to the big politics hitters on WP. Even Chip Berlet can get edited into submission by some of the hardcore obsessives. Most of SV's worst antics are off main article space, on the rfc's, the policy pages, the ANI board, the community issues. Her impact on article content is overrated. Jayjg's ongoing laborious - at times comic - campaign of damage limitation regarding Israel smacks of an obsessive amateur rather than a professional mind.
The pair of them are too sloppy, too fallible, and have stuck their necks out way too far to be considered intelligence assets to anyone. Despite SV's dalliances during the Lockerbie affair, which stemmed from personal involvement, her involvement in WP almost certainly comes from current addiction to the website. Based on the evidence I've seen, I've ruled out any more sinister motives until something new turns up.
Let's speculate. Suppose an intelligent asset did not seek to intervene in article writing. Suppose they sought status in the community. Suppose the asset sought a relationship with a person with the capacity to determine the IP address of users. This could result in the betrayal of people who edited with sharp POV on articles related to say... Palestine, Israeli Peace Movement, Hamas, Hezbolah, Iran's Nuclear Project, Kashmir, Bosnia. Access to IP addresses and related information might prove invaluable when collated against other information. Watergate Plumbers, Ollie North in the White House basement, Killing Castro with exploding cigars, Gay Bombs, Chalabi. The bar is not that high.
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Sun 5th August 2007, 8:00pm)
Not an actual intelligence agent, but some sort of minor asset. . . .
That would be my take as well. Although I am no intelligence gathering expert either, it still appears clear that SlimLinda lacks the stability that should be expected of an agent. The mere fact that someone is highly intellegent and very manipulative does not necessarily mean they would make a good agent. If she has an actual tie to an intelligence agency, I suspect that it would be as a minor informant, or maybe even as a patsy.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.