What's the story behind this thread at ANI? Shankbone says, "Unfortunately, this user is well-known to all of us here, and at Wikipedia Review."

It is DS continuing his poisonous feud against The Fiery Angel, as we know him here.

How DS is allowed to make all his outing comments with impunity and with such venom on a public page of Wikipedia without sanction continues to amazeunsurprise many of us here.

I guess most admins like to take care in choosing their battles and I assume that blocking Shankbone would provoke a rather large brouhaha.

They could at least have the decency to tone down the inappropriate edits which DS is clearly making as deliberately inflammatory as possible, including the link to the article he penned on ED.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=231793917

So who's Folantin?

And yeah, I wouldn't touch that. I admire Alison's well-measured remark of sanity.

DS has built up a lot of goodwill from his usually good contributions. He also has at least two relatively influential friends: Raul and SlimVirgin. I wish he wouldn't track his ED attacks into the house.

Unfortunately, the same can be said of David Shankbone.

Tragically, the same can be said of David Shankbone's penis.

If I am reading this correctly, it appears that Shankbone is outing someone. Isn't there supposed to be some kind of penalty for that? Observe also Shankbone's response to NYB on his talk page. I think blocks are customary in cases like this.

Shankbone has a "free immunity pass".


Also enjoyed by Jjay, Crum 375, Durova, Hochman, ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhnd............ (rhymes with Quimsturgeon)

I think that about covers it, but I don't know everything. Though I attempt to make it seem so.

Editors with the inability to pick battles correctly rarely (if ever) make it past an RfA. Sometimes they loose this ability just before retirement, but that is about all.

Meanwhile, the proverbial shit is hitting the fan, as Moreschi proceeds to defame BAN ME! on ANI, in reponse to Sir Fozzie telling people to stop defaming Living People.

The great and the good have weighed in, with DS playing the innocent "Duh, did I do something wrong?" all justified because WR is a cesspit of vile behaviour. Ho hum.

TFA doesn't exactly help himself (apparently been silly boy with anagram user names), but he should know that whatever he does, DS can sink far, far lower, and will get away with it. Probably be a good thing for TFA to be indef blocked, for his own good.

It bears mention that Shankbone is one of the few people ever banned from Wikipedia Review - which puts him in the same bucket as Amorrow.

Shankbone makes a kinda weird remark toward NYB, who was agreeing with Durova and SirFozzie that the comment on sexual orientation was inappropriate.

See conversation in final state.

Commentary by Lar and SirFozzie who, who seem to think it wasn't a light-hearted remark. David archives the conversation (that is, deletes it). SirFozzie promises to bring an ANI, which has been posted and closed. Shankbone makes BADSITES-style claims. Huge round of personal attacks, ANI closed.

WR is the new cabal, apparently.

EDIT: splitting Moreschi topic into new post. I think these are both worth discussing, but not together.

Who the hell is Folantin? When I wanna know something like that, I search WR:
Moreschi and Folantin's WAR ON THE TROMBONE!!, ....and Makemi's neo-feminist stance!
Moreschi : We're not Sockpuppets..., ....it just looks that way....
hmm....The NEW improved Deletionist Cabal...

Hmm. Top three google hits, and all are threads by TFA. I checked further down the results and have found several treads and posts by TFA about these two. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that Moreschi/Folantin (whether two people or just one) don't like TFA, and the feeling is apparently mutual. In retrospect, it wouldn't have taken much work to figure out who TFA was.

When Shankbone wants to bust TFA's balls, Moreschi and Folantin don't mind at all (understatement).

Does anyone else think this might be a COI issue? It might be fine, but I would probably be more comfortable if admins didn't single-handedly block someone who is apparently their biggest off-wiki critic (these threads are TFA's--it seems like all of the Moreschi posts here are). Parties of an ArbCom decision should probably not enforce the decision themselves.

First, consider what the damn decision even says:
Moreschi explains his reasoning for the indef block here. (EDIT: WR won't let me put in the full url with anchor. Apparently using the name triggers some replacement code for "BAN ME! BAN ME!" weird.)

It seems there are COI edits in Gretab's deleted contributions. Sounds like evasion, but for the benefit of non admins, here's the punchline: these edits happened in February 2007, adding a source to his own pre-existing BLP per a talk page request. But don't forget about the promotional edits to alleged MF recording artist Germaine Tailleferre, Hugely promotional edit in April, OMG!, And another from last week October. Also check out this article where an MF artist was edited from "outstanding" to the much more promotional word "capable." The Wiki is now safe from COI. Indefinitely. Whew.

Ah well, perhaps he should have been blocked, for his own good, as said above, and at least for a time. Lar suggested a block of 1 day - 2 weeks, and TFA'a personal attacks and COI might deserve something. You should use the talk page when you have a COI, even if the edits are trivial. But Moreshi isn't acting on the level here, and I don't like it. He should have at least mentioned his history with TFA. I think failing to mention an ugly past with someone you block is on par with editing while COI. Thoughts?

Well, since I'm blocked over there, I might as well explain myself here.

The decision in the Arbcom case read as follows :



Now, the way I read this is that the words used are "artists" and "projects listed in their sales catalog". The word "artist" is not the same (at least in the music world) as the word "composer". An "artist" is the person who performs the music (see for example the "search the repertoire page on BMI, where artists and composers are separate fields : http://www.bmi.com/search/). However, "projects listed in their sales catalog" would be specific works composed by composers in the catalog. Works composed by composers in the catalog but published by others would be not be a conflict of interest, since information about them would not lead to sales.

So, for example, this diff. dealt with a ballet that we don't publish. By saying that the Paris Opera Ballet refused to produce it, am I adding commercial value to the work in question? The Leguerney article was created before we started publishing him. In this diff, the work is unpublished (and will probably never be published, since there are editorial problems with it) and I am only correcting the instrumentation. How does this add commercial value?

In this diff. I'm pointing out that the only source for the article is the webpage in question: I ought to know: I wrote the whole thing. It's all unsourced (in spite of the bibliography) because it's principally original research. The worst is the works list, because it's all based on first-hand analysis of the manuscript objects and secondary sources which remain unpublished. This should probably be stubbed and rewritten, using Grove as a base (even if Grove is wrong on certain facts...)

Francis Poulenc is not in the MF catalog. Neither is Milhaud or any of the others. The edits on my own article were to avoid what eventually happened, which was a "revenge" deletion. Now that this is behind us....well, at least on the English WP, as DS has nominated in the same article for deletion in French WP...this all becomes rather moot, wouldn't you say?

That's your fault anyway: you shouldn't have written the article in the first place!, you say? Well, that's exactly right. Except that once you write the article, you can't take it back. And once you realize what you've done, it's too late. And if I may, might I ask how many times does one have to pay for the same mistake?

This COI business was a red herring to begin with. The conflict was due to the fact that I busted Moreschi and Folantin's little operatic game of voting on "who was important" and "who was not", and when their toys were taken away, they flew into a huge rage: follow the diffs from here.. It's obviously going to lead to a "community ban" and there's no point fighting it. I'm grateful to those who are trying to find a solution to this, but I rather doubt that there will be anything that they can do.

In any case, I still can't believe how long it took them to figure it out...

I think that's right. Moreschi is not "enforcing" the ArbCom decision--he's unilaterally imposing a ban on one of his least favorite people. But if you were banned for a couple of weeks instead, there's no chance that you would have much future at Wikipedia under that account.

Maybe Folantin did figure it out awhile ago...

....that guy's a real case and tends to use his user page as an attack page.

The "War on Trombone players" thread is priceless.. Follow the links for a good laugh.

Hmm, I wonder if Moreshi is a reader. He brought up his extensive history only after my post...after fighting over Gretab on Wikipedia in several forums. Hi, Moreschi!

Look, this needs to be a community ban. The ArbCom decision doesn't authorize it (it says one week), and Moreschi essentially wheel-warred with Thatcher in order to block a user he's very involved in. Moreschi should be warned, the block dropped, and Gretab brought up again on ANI or someplace for an actual impartial admin to block him for a term deemed reasonable.

I doubt TFA even cares to fight for his account, but Moreschi's illegitimate block should not stand.

Very weird. I don't know what he means by that, and I probably don't want to know.

Not weird...just not very subtle. And probably not appreciated by NYB at all.

In the meantime, over on French WP, Shankbone's campaign to delete the PW article over there ain't going so great...

Exported conflicts to other WMF projects... from English WP. Total class.

Hey, keep it in perspective: Shankbone called NYB a butch "papa bear", that's all. It's not as if he said he liked blondes or something.

....actually, it is...and it's sort of a veiled threat, in many respects. You can read quite a bit into that remark....

LOL! I speak some piss poor French, but bablefishing David's deletion request...



C'mon, half of this is "Delete because english WP doesn't like him, and neither do I," plus no one looks at the articles anyway. You gotta be kidding me, this is the cattiest delete reason of all time.

The discussion section there--apparently the old WP:VAIN idea is not disallowed on French Wikipedia. Strike 1 against this delete request:



Next section, strike 2:



First Keep is a simple keep, second one:



David replies to him:



Only "Delete" so far:



Between David making inappropriate comments with implications towards Brad's sexuality (What the fuck, David) and this thread...

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

Dude, you oughta stop before they firing squad you. Seriously. Add in the over-the-top attacks on Sandy--thats dumb, you know, seeing as she has many more friends in way more important places than you EVER have had--I mean, honestly. If you're trying to blaze of glory to get banned, keep it up.

Just as a note, if you use FireFox you might want to look into the Translator add-on by Byron Adams. It lets you mouseclick to get a new page (more convenient than babelfish directly) and it's fairly easy to change translators so you can try google (which I thought gave better results on that page).

Hope that's helpful.

The party has been moved to Folantin's talkpage...

Yes, Virginia, Knol has no COI policy. Neither does Wikipedia Review.

...of course, this isn't the first time that Folantin's user space has been used as an attack page. But just imagine what fun he and his new friend DS are going to have, right on WP?

Shankbone found that because it was brought up in his failing French deletion request. Incidentally, can you tell us how painful his French babelfish is on the eyes? One of the comments seems to say he should just use English, but that's a reading from my painful babelfish translation.

I don't think they have COI on ED either...

If somebody at French WP told an anglophone just speak English, please, it must be pretty bad.

I'm not following this at all. If it's deleted, it's deleted. If it's saved, it's saved. But French WP has very different policies regarding notability, COI, autobiography and the like. The French don't like to be told what to do, especially by English speakers. And they really don't like people off of EN:WP teling them that "our arbcom decided this, so you need to do that". The best way to get the exact opposite reaction of what you want on another project's AFD process is to say "we did it this way on EN:WP".

You'll have to ask Mr. Shankbone about COI on ED because he obviously has first-hand experience....

Indeed, you could get most projects to do almost anything by saying you represent English Wikipedia and you demand the opposite.

To DS, you can express yourself in English, if you think that you could express yourself better that way....

It's exceedingly polite...but very subtle. This isn't a personal attack, but that's why I enjoy speaking French....

C'était un dégât. (cut-down; putting him in his place)

The person was polite and helpful, but in a manner such as to communicate disdain.

"Pour tourner autour du pot" (indirect communication - classic French. Say what you mean, without ever saying it.)

I'm sure he didn't get the point, whatsoever. That's part of the fun of making such a comment. Or reading it.