On 27 June I was asked by Thatcher to help deal with pro-paedo bias in historical articles.



For example, it was being claimed with very little properly sourced evidence that Jules Verne was a paedophile. I did so with the help of an editor called Phdarts whose contributions I looked at and judged worthwhile. I made a considerble number of edits to the

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...rget=Hinnibilis

Most of the corrections were to absurd, ungrammatical or plain incorrect claims. Some of my comments:

"rm politics reference - wrong chapter and is misquoted anyway"
"rm absurdly general and unverifiable statement"
"rm original research"
in which I was helped by PhDarts. There was no opposition at all from the pro-paedo editors.

Then I caught this edit to Haiduc's page

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=221444762

"Like you, I am much pressed for time, though I think that matters have gone beyond personal intervention - however well-authenticated - and now demand third-party intervention (as before). "

This 'third party intervention' was not long in coming. Phdart's account has been blocked for sockpuppeteering. He was, as I suspected, a reincarnation of the banned Headleydown, but I did not have a problem with that. He was editing under my supervision, and had made many strong contributions to the encyclopedia under other accounts. (FT2 has pointed to some abusive edits he has made, but haven't we all).

I complained bitterly on FT2's talk page and have also contributed to a thread on paedophilia subjects to the Wikipedia Review. I did not accuse FT2 of being pro-paedophile, I said that he was 'in effect' enabling the pro-paedophile lobby on Wikipedia. I do not see how editors with expert knowledge of this subject area can possibly continue to work under these conditions.

I see that my edits have apparently been reverted wholesale. Hinnibilis (talk) 18:44, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hinnibilis"

Naerii, for what it is worth, please see Wikipedia:Harass#Off-wiki_harassment -- Avi (talk) 20:41, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Bah, some of our policies are so full of shit.. are we going to start blocking people for what they've said on IRC now? Or in any other forum for that matter? Criticising people (whether the criticism is justified or not) off Wikipedia should be completely irrelevant to whether you get blocked or not on Wikipedia - it is rather ridiculous to suggest that we can control what people say on other areas of the internet. Naerii 20:44, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

You obviously aren't aware of what Peter's real beef is will FT2, and the problems that got him blocked first time round so I'll elaborate here. Since December, Peter has been promoting his ideas that FT2 has been having sex with animals (zoophilia) simply because of his editing habits. His original block was because he was going to take his case to animal welfare authorities. Instead of doing this, he's turned his attention to making these baseless accusations on WR - that's serious harassment and when you look at the scope of all his posts, they just about always revolve around FT2 somewhat. Ryan Postlethwaite 20:50, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Someone should call out the EFF on these guys.

Only if it is in good faith.

If there is support for leniency on this block, based on the fact that the user in question makes constructive edits outside this area, I'd propose a 6 month block and two community restrictions: restriction to a single account, and a permanent ban on edits directed towards or about FT2. Avruch 21:09, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

For all this interested, [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive338#User:Dbuckner here] is the discussion on the original account block. Ryan Postlethwaite 21:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Look stop the jokes could someone have the decency please to comment on ANI and refer the discussion to my talk page — it is quite preposterous what Ryan is saying. I have always been very careful when posting on WR to make clear the distinction between the practice of whatever, and the promotion of whatever. My original beef with FT2 concerned NPOV and tag-teaming and nothing else. Please someone have the decency to stop this. Please.

But, Demian, you are the biggest joke of all.

Why don't you stop yourself?

Then we'll stop laughing.

Jon

I would support this too. PD really needs to leave FT2 alone, regardless of the merit or lack thereof. ++Lar: t/c 21:15, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

You think I'm a joke because I am a heretic. You are an atheist.

Why don't we just have an Arbitration committee hearing, in public, on the whole matter. That, in effect, was what we agreed to drop in May, when I return. Don't tell, don't ask. Are any of these clowns on ANI aware of this? Ask yourself, why was I allowed to return without any questions asked, no arbitration, nothing. It was easier that way, and I accepted it? Does anyone want to do this the hard way? OK>

Why don't we just have an Arbitration committee hearing, in public, on the whole matter. That, in effect, was what we agreed to drop in May, when I return. Don't tell, don't ask. Are any of these clowns on ANI aware of this? Ask yourself, why was I allowed to return without any questions asked, no arbitration, nothing. It was easier that way, and I accepted it? Does anyone want to do this the hard way? OK>

If you're getting beat up in the schoolyard sandbox by a bunch of bullies, you have a couple of choices...

Run for your life and ask your mommy and daddy to phone the police or the superindendent of schools.

Or, run for your life and get even bigger kids to come back to the schoolyard with you and have a big rumble in the sandbox, where everybody gets bloody.

Or, stay in the sandbox and continue to get your butt kicked.

Sounds like you keep doing the third one, and it is getting a bit funny.

Greg

Look stop the jokes could someone have the decency please to comment on ANI and refer the discussion to my talk page - it is quite preposterous what Ryan is saying.

The good-faith article is a serious issue.

In order for me to comment on Wikipedia and make it look worthy enough, I would have to create a new account. At this time, I'm not interested in a new account. Admins suggested to me to start fresh and unknown... and that just doesn't really resolve the issue.

I have no doubt in my mind that anybody who starts Wikipedia and edits a controversial article will run into 'not-fun' situations.

If you're getting beat up in the schoolyard sandbox by a bunch of bullies, you have a couple of choices...

Run for your life and ask your mommy and daddy to phone the police or the superindendent of schools.

Or, run for your life and get even bigger kids to come back to the schoolyard with you and have a big rumble in the sandbox, where everybody gets bloody.

Or, stay in the sandbox and continue to get your butt kicked.

Sounds like you keep doing the third one, and it is getting a bit funny.

Greg

Damian
In this edit you have indicated that the old account of Damian was unblocked per Arbcom decision. Can you point me out to the decision? Does he have any editing restrictions on working under the new account or is he is supposed to be clear? Alex Bakharev (talk) 02:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

It was via IRC, mainly in discussion with FloNight and FT2, as I recall. I do not recall any conditions. Thatcher 03:18, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for answering! Alex Bakharev (talk) 04:00, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Thatcher

Admins suggested to me to start fresh and unknown... and that just doesn't really resolve the issue.
I have no doubt in my mind that anybody who starts Wikipedia and edits a controversial article will run into 'not-fun' situations.

The facts of the matter are clear. FT2 has been slanting the bestiality article. FT2 seems to have been running sockpuppets to support his practice of NLP. FT2 seems to have been quite keen on banning anti-pedophile editors (some of whom are socks).

FT2 was elected in despite all of the POV pushing he is obviously guilty of.

He was elected, at least in part, because, it seems, that WJBscribe prevailed upon an unknown (for now) individual to have FT2's incriminating edits oversighted, in flagrant violation of the oversight policy, to protect FT2's reputation during the election.

Though Scribe knew of the oversights at the time, his only provable crime was to stand by. From what he has said in private, I think it is clear he was acting innocently, if rather stupidly.

You'd probably be blocked as a sockpuppet of this HeadleyDown.

Bingo.

He was elected, at least in part, because, it seems, that WJBscribe prevailed upon an unknown (for now) individual to have FT2's incriminating edits oversighted, in flagrant violation of the oversight policy, to protect FT2's reputation during the election.

Look, Pro, just start out as a fresh sock and do it right. A really successful sock has to build up street cred. Go to Hebrew school. One of FT2's first posts was to note that the singular of mitzvoh is mitzvah, and link that term. Well, anybody can learn that kind of thing especially for a word you hear all the time, as in bar mitzvah; you don't have to be Jewish to like Nathan's Hot Dogs!

But then, go bold! FT2 took the SlimVirgin route, and edited Nazi-Collaborator articles and ODESSA, stepped into the Israel vs. Palestinian kids violence question, and finally topped it off with a general statement about how the average Jew feels about Jesus! [Answer: He's irrelevant] This is chutzpah if you're not Jewish! [And even if you are]. But it doesn't matter, because after you do this sort of thing enough, it doesn't matter if your screenname is SlimVirgin or even Ryan Postelthwaithe, you'll be as nearly bulletproof as JoshuaZ, Mantanmoreland, and Durova were, for all that time, and for the same reasons. You'll be made an admin (with oversighting of funny edits if you need that) and can then can go on to write articles about screwing St. Bernards, if that's what you want! Nobody will bother you, and if they do, you can blockinate them. If anybody hassles you about this, you'll always find folks like Stephen Shultz and Avi Avraham to say you're only human. By which they mean they mean you're human, but also a Mensch.

So do it right, next time.

Er, it's possible I'm wrong about all this, and people like Slim also know NLP and use it like FT2 to subtly program and seduce the minds of all other admnistrators, in order to get whatever they want. You never know.

M.

Tell us the story.

For example, he admitted he just gave up at one point because it was all too difficult and beyond anything he could comprehend.

This is the chair of the mediation committee, now also a bureaucrat?

This is our "lawyer living in London?"

Yes indeed. But in fairness to the guy, he is very young, he is merely a paralegal of some sort, and I would not want to jeopardise his career by any of this being made public. He was just very stupid and naive. I do respect the fact his written statement was very careful and considered, and accurate. In fact I respect that more than anything else. We need more of that on-wiki.

This is the trouble I have with the way these discussions always go when someone in a position of authority screws up royally. "But he/she is not a bad person." Having dealt with the man on several occasions, I'm not clear on that, but that's not the point. If he is just "stupid and naïve", and faced with problems "too difficult and beyond anything he could comprehend," he should step down - or be stepped down - from his positions in the leadership. Do all these promotions to important-sounding positions mean there is something that needs to be done, and done correctly, or are they just ways of saying, "WJBscribe, you're a well-meaning person." Are we trying to build a competently-managed project, or is everyone here to make the leadership feel good?

I haven't gone to WR to see if Ryan's description of the situation there is correct

Support Block - Due to the increasing disruptive nature and loutish behavior of these anti-pedophile activists, including running off very respectable editors who have never edited in a controversial area (except perhaps removing incorrect child abuse categories from classic works of literature), it is my opinion that they are a net negative to the project. They think Wikipedia is a battleground to fight sexual predators when, in fact, it is not. We don't need their kind of help, quite frankly. They should be shown the door and allowed to come back only after a 6 month to one year block and only if they are serious. They should be topic banned from all sexuality related topics. --Dragon695 (talk) 23:50, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Support block Enough, is enough. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:08, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

This Knowledge consists of the techniques to obtain stillness, peace, and contentment within the individual: the happiness of the true self-understanding.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prem_Rawat

But thats just the thing, you know this to be true. Even the Greeks have admitted that Philosophy came from Egypt and that it was stolen by Aristotle during Alexander the Greats invasion of Egypt. There is more then enough proof. So why not change the Philosophy page, edit it and put up correct information for people to read and learn. Be honest, what proof is there showing that Greek Philosophy really is Greek Philosophy? Theres no way to Verify if it is really of Greek birth.

: You have a very good point. Sadly I have been banned forever from Wikipedia for arguing just this kind of thing. Perhaps you could try to continue the good work? This is important stuff, you will just have to deal with a lot of POV warriors. Good luck. ~~~~
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=222519778

Here's a neutral voice for you:


Maybe Jossi can take FT2's place on ArbCom?

Seriously I am now thinking that Greg, Aubrey & all were right that there is no hope of salvaging the project. What I have seen in the past few days beggars belief. Literally, no one would believe you if you had made it up.

So what to do? Those who know me, know I never do anything by halves. If the thing can't be fixed, then destroy it utterly.

I am going to relax for a week and try and forget about everything, and also wait in case my mail to Arbcom gets an answer, for we must be fair. Meanwhile, how would one go about completely destroying Wikipedia? It is beyond a joke what is going on here. Well placed letters to Charitable donors? Blogs, more blogs? My blog on Medieval philosophy has a wide readership, as does my website.

Or subtle vandalisms that no uneducated person would spot? I have never done this before, although sometimes I leave the more amusing ones uncorrected to see how long they last.

Any other ideas? Probably deserves separate thread. If you are going to do something, do it really well.

In fact I have made a small start here:

Seriously I am now thinking that Greg, Aubrey & all were right that there is no hope of salvaging the project.

With a bit more substantiated evidence and minus the flame euphoria, this would be more interesting. I think you have shown enough to prove your block is controversial, which probably makes it worse since there are many admins unwilling to take action, and it is not because of you.

You let me know by e-mail when you're no longer merely thinking about it, but rather have concluded such, and then we can talk about destruction.

Oh, and there's no "u" in Awbrey.

Greg

LOL! Isn't mitzvoh just an alternative spelling of mitzvah? Or does it have something to do with hot dogs? ;p

Ur, for the record, FT2 got this right. It's my mistake.

And for the record, Ur means Light.

No, Or means light (Yehu Or - Let there be light:Genesis 1:3). Ur means a flame (Isaiah 50:11).

But in fairness to the guy, he is very young, he is merely a paralegal of some sort, and I would not want to jeopardise his career by any of this being made public. He was just very stupid and naive. I do respect the fact his written statement was very careful and considered, and accurate. In fact I respect that more than anything else. We need more of that on-wiki.

I'm a little at a loss to understand the direction this threat has gone in. I blocked this editor's original account indefinitely at the end of lack year for a serious campaign of harassment against another user. It was decided to allow him to resume editing under a new name following an appeal to ArbCom. My understanding from a discussion with FloNight was that the unblock was conditional on him leaving FT2 alone. In my view an apology to FT2 was also needed, but I acquiesced to the unblock. If he has violated his agreement by harassing FT2 again, then the restoration of the original indefblock is appropriate. Has Peter Damian undertaken to drop his vendetta against FT2? If so, terms of an unblock can be discussed. If not, he should remain blocked. WjBscribe 23:00, 30 June 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=222753260

Look, Pro, just start out as a fresh sock and do it right. A really successful sock has to build up street cred. Go to Hebrew school. One of FT2's first posts was to note that the singular of mitzvoh is mitzvah, and link that term. Well, anybody can learn that kind of thing especially for a word you hear all the time, as in bar mitzvah; you don't have to be Jewish to like Nathan's Hot Dogs!

But then, go bold! FT2 took the SlimVirgin route, and edited Nazi-Collaborator articles and ODESSA, stepped into the Israel vs. Palestinian kids violence question, and finally topped it off with a general statement about how the average Jew feels about Jesus! [Answer: He's irrelevant] This is chutzpah if you're not Jewish! [And even if you are]. But it doesn't matter, because after you do this sort of thing enough, it doesn't matter if your screenname is SlimVirgin or even Ryan Postelthwaithe, you'll be as nearly bulletproof as JoshuaZ, Mantanmoreland, and Durova were, for all that time, and for the same reasons. You'll be made an admin (with oversighting of funny edits if you need that) and can then can go on to write articles about screwing St. Bernards, if that's what you want! Nobody will bother you, and if they do, you can blockinate them. If anybody hassles you about this, you'll always find folks like Stephen Shultz and Avi Avraham to say you're only human. By which they mean they mean you're human, but also a Mensch.

So do it right, next time.

Er, it's possible I'm wrong about all this, and people like Slim also know NLP and use it like FT2 to subtly program and seduce the minds of all other admnistrators, in order to get whatever they want. You never know.

M.

Well the programming issue is definitely there in the OrangeMarlin case. Nothing to do with hocus pocus, just FT2 and support from his pseudoscienc mates.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...y_User:Fainites

http://www.nlpconnections.com/members/fainites.html

FT2 has an extremely strong reason to want to ban editors who try to deal with the pseudoscientists on WP. FT2 has tended to psuedoscience and kick anyone who disagrees with said pushing.

Its the same with anything on WP. Anything you believe in has power, as long as you are able to boot who you like, and get protected by a sizable lump of admins.

An example is…

There we go, stir that up some more.

An example is the ban of Gold heart, who was community banned for revealing medical information about Alison

I was community banned for asking Durova to provide evidence of how I gave misleading information to journalists.

Greg, was your Bill of Attainder actually voted on and passed by the community as a whole, rather than being just the arbitrary and capricious act of a single admin acting independently of any community consensus?

What, I was just providing an example of a community ban