Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Susanne2009NYC
> Wikimedia Discussion > The Wikipedia Annex
Ottava
Susanne2009NYC began shortly after Kathyrnecelestewright aka ItsLassieTime, was indeffed.

Both editors work primarily on Beatrice Potter. Susanne's second edit was to join the obscure Children's Lit project. After having worked with Kathyrne for over 6 months, I can see a strong resemblance between the two.

I notified MuZemike which led to this statement but the account was not yet blocked. It is obviously the same person.

I am saddened by this section. Particularly, this claim by Sandy either suggesting that I did not check the sources or that I am Kathyrine.

I did check the sources and even rechecked them tonight. From what is limited in googlebooks, randomly entering quotes did not provide any results. Full copies with page numbers to look for slightly changed text is not available online. This page attacks me some more, acting as if I never bothered to look at the sources. A little investigation would show that I publicly provided a source check for the GAN Flore ett Zephire. As you can see, there is some plagiarism but most is buried deep in text and a lot of it is reworked. Not the most obvious and not always present.

I find it a little odd how Sandy would attack me, when I provided hundreds of source checks at FAC and revealed tons of plagiarism at FAC, GAN, and DYK. Instead, I spotted the sock before Sandy arrived and dealt with the issue on the person's previous account.


Update: Susanne2009NYC was finally blocked.
thekohser
I'm glad that's taken care of, and that bad person will never edit Wikipedia again!
SB_Johnny
QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 17th November 2010, 6:47am) *

I'm glad that's taken care of, and that bad person will never edit Wikipedia again!

Kumbaya!!! laugh.gif
Theanima
QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 17th November 2010, 11:47am) *

I'm glad that's taken care of, and that bad person will never edit Wikipedia again!


Not a bad person per se, but definitely bad edits. They had numerous copyvios, and issues with plagiarism.
SB_Johnny
QUOTE(Theanima @ Wed 17th November 2010, 8:14am) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 17th November 2010, 11:47am) *

I'm glad that's taken care of, and that bad person will never edit Wikipedia again!


Not a bad person per se, but definitely bad edits. They had numerous copyvios, and issues with plagiarism.

shrug.gif letsgetdrunk.gif
Ottava
QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 17th November 2010, 6:47am) *

I'm glad that's taken care of, and that bad person will never edit Wikipedia again!



The point of the thread was that I was flooded with concerns that Sandy was accusing me of being ItsLassieTime, which bothered me. She posted a clarification after I left for the night.


However, Sandy claims that ItsLassieTime provided sources for the To Autumn page. She did not. She was merely a copyeditor. I provided 100% all sourcing. Apparently, the two threads I have here have merged - my responses will be found on this page.
Jon Awbrey
QUOTE

GET
A
LIFE
!!!

Herschelkrustofsky
Our work here is done.
Zoloft
QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Wed 17th November 2010, 7:31am) *

Our work here is done.

As an honest townsman, I am disappointed. I fully expected to be handed a silver bullet before the masked horseman rode off into the sunset.
Jon Awbrey
QUOTE(Zoloft @ Wed 17th November 2010, 12:29pm) *

QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Wed 17th November 2010, 7:31am) *

Our work here is done.


As an honest townsman, I am disappointed. I fully expected to be handed a silver bullet before the masked horseman rode off into the sunset.


You'll have to settle for a cloud of dust …

Or maybe a “Dook 'em, Banno” …

Jon tongue.gif
Ottava
SandyGeorgia has requested a source check analysis of To Autumn

I just spent a few hours putting one together right here but it is not yet complete. I took each chunk of text and quoted the actual source on the matter so others can compare for themselves. I have to finish the Themes section later.
Obesity
QUOTE(Theanima @ Wed 17th November 2010, 8:14am) *

Not a bad person per se, but definitely bad edits.


LOL bad edits r dumb.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.