hi everybody. i'm a newbie so please forgive me if this is the wrong place to be discussing things like this. i really need to vent. this susanbryce whacko is out of control.... and the wiki-community is endorsing it.

first a little background about myself. i'm an american. i'm white. i'm a guy. i retired from police work a few years ago and i started a business in the philippines on the former american air force base here in the philippines.

(my america cell phone rings at 4am in the philippines)
me: hi, its 4am.
my 65 year old mom: what are you doing living in a city with 150,000 prostitutes?
me: huh?
mom: what are you doing living in a.... (repeats herself as mom's do. i cut her off.)
me: i heard you. i just dont know what you are talking about.
mom: on the internet it says that there are 150,000 sex slave prostitutes in angeles. (angeles only has about 280,000 residents so thats impossible)
me: mom, me and my sex slave are trying to sleep now. send me an email to where you are reading this. i'm sure its a joke.
mom: its not a joke. it must be true its on the internet encyclopedia.

....and so starts my involvement with wikipedia. some whacko named susanbryce is posting outrageous and unfounded accusations about the city i live in. i try to correct the errors. i get accused of attacking her when i correct the errors. i (wrongly) figure that if she is going to accuse me of attacking her then what the heck, i should just attack her. i do a little research.

it turns out susanbryce is actually a former prostitute from angeles and is well known by the police here for her outrageous delusions. she thinks all foreigners are pedophiles. she has grand delusions of saving thousands of children through the NGO she founded (which nobody in Angeles can seem to locate). she now works part time for PREDA, which is a very controversial organization here. it seems they have a habit of offering children 50,000 pesos to say that white foreigners abuse them. i dont know why they leave out the other asian populations, especially since most visitors to the philippines are other asians, but they do. as a result of this being exposed the organization, contrary to susanbryce's claims, is no longer active here.

so after trying very hard to correct information in the angeles city article on wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angeles_City , the article now is fairly honest and neutral. legally operating businesses are no longer called brothels in error. wild government conspiracy theories on covering up child prostitution and executions arent there anymore.

so then susanbryce creates the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_traffic...in_Angeles_City .

this is actually a bit funny because there has NEVER been one case of human trafficking to date in Angeles. pointing this out (repeatedly) and taking the errors out of the article has resulted in me being banned in december 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...n/RodentofDeath

now i have just noticed that they have extended my one year ban because someone else has edited the article. i guess any edits that dont conform to the delusion that angeles is filled with pedophiles and child prostitutes will get blamed on me and my ban extended.

the article now has lovely things in it about prostitution (which isnt human trafficking). susanbryce changes the convictions of people from what the citation says is employing minors to human trafficking. she uses newspaper articles of people being arrested as proof of a problem even though the charges were later dropped. of course, there is no newspaper article about the fact the the charges were dropped when all "child victims" were later found to be over 18.

here is one more link for your enjoyment. it is a petition to stop the killing fields of angeles (another hoax by susan bryce) http://www.petitiononline.com/44441212/petition.html

now i wouldnt care to much about an internet article on wikipedia except for one thing. i have a friend that just graduated from nursing school. she came from a very poor town in Samar, Philippines. she grew up in a little bamboo shack thats typical for that area. she has 7 brothers and sisters. she came to work in Angeles to support her family when her father died. she got a job as a go-go dancer at the age of 19. she was making more money in a week than her father had made in a month. not only did she work 9 hours a day, seven days a week (her choice not to take a day off) but she also put continued her education and paid for the education of her family. yes, its sad but you need to pay to go to high school here. so now at the age of 26 she was denied a visa to america where she had a job lined up. the reason the embassy denied her visa was they said she was an angeles prostitute!!! the absurdity is that at 26 she is still a virgin and so has obviously never had sex.

if you think letting outrageous and untrue stories about far away places exist on wikipedia isnt really hurting anyone, you are sadly mistaken.

thanks for letting me vent. i feel better now. feel free to do as you wish with this info. if you would like information on what the situation here actually is feel free to ask.

Can you provide any evidence of this?

Please. Use. Capital. Letters.

Anyway... maybe this editor is worth a look. Sounds like a common straw-man troll (Jayjg, MONGO etc.). Any specific diffs of hers that illustrate these things?

The arbitration case is a joke; fitting that FloNight, 5-time winner of the Miltopia Worst Arbitrator in the World Award, would make the first error, saying "us and the community" instead of "we and the community" ;-) It implies endorsement of Rodent being a "single-pupose account" because he has very narrow article edits. You will have diverse writing interests, and find the time to work on them all, or you will be banned. Nice ones. Meanwhile, Susanbryce comes out whistling clean save for a "reminder".

I have to say though, edits like this don't exactly make you look entirely innocent:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=149115337

What I will say is that this article Human trafficking in Angeles City is an outrageous POV fork and should be dispersed.

Also I don't understand how you were targetted as a "single purpose account" while Susanbryce was not?


Who does? The poster? Or Susanbryce. Neither of them sound anything like the above to me.

I meant Susan Bryce, the strawmanning was my thoughts about her going all over the place refusing to hear any dissent about the existence of this human trafficking... not really strawing at all though. More like begging the question, like she argues about the specifics of the article, ignoring Rodent's protests that the article shouldn't even exist in the first place.


????????

I dunno. I'm tired.

My recommendation, and I know this sounds lame, would be to politely but emphatically contact the City of Angeles government, and perhaps most especially the Tourism Bureau for either Angeles or the Philippines (or both), and strongly urge them to contact Jimmy Wales, Florence Devouard, Sue Gardner, and Mike Godwin, and insist that this non-encyclopedic article receive the same "WP:UNDUE" respect that Jimbo's relationship with Marsden received. At best, there should be a sentence or two about prostitution, et al, in the Wikipedia article about Angeles, nothing more.

Greg

It's going to be deleted. I removed some of the sources that aren't really sources at all, but there's still a ridiculous amount. It's going to be deleted in AfD anyway.

That's not quite certain. SqueakBox is defending the article.

Yes, the thing to do is to get an official person to complain. Not get personally upset or involved.

Not worth it.

Especially with this crowd.

Wow!! I'm quite stunned at how objective people are here. Thanks for everybody's opinions and help. Sorry about the lack of capital letters.

As per the request for evidence susanbryce changes the conviction from employing minors to human trafficking, it is located here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=174852840
It's been re-inserted several times. I could dig further into the edits if you feel it's necessary.

I was reluctant to contact anyone connected with city government for two reasons. First, I felt any contributions by them would be a conflict of interest and would feed into the huge government cover-up conspiracy. Secondly, I dont believe they have the resources to handle any internet issues. While Angeles is fairly modern, this is still a 3rd world country. Businesses, Banks and government are not computerized for the most part. It's still a paper records and carbon copy world here.

susanbryce is now claiming that i am weighted Companion Cube along with other delusions of me "breaching" my ban twice. for the record, i havent posted since i was banned except on my user page to say that i havent posted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Adm...ion_enforcement

I think it might also be important to point out that human trafficking and prostitution are not the same thing. They are separate crimes covered by seperate laws. There really is nothing that supports her claim there is ANY human trafficking in Angeles. I will be the first to admit that there is some prostitution but that is not the subject of this article.

To be fair, some of her edits on other pages are informative. Edits with anything to do with Angeles or children seem to be crap. I guess we can just wait for the results of the AfD since that would get rid of most of her crap. I do have a favorite edit of hers. She repeatedly calls legally operating go-go bars brothels. She claims they are prostituting child employees. She then removes information saying that all bar employees are over the age of 18. Her edit summary reads:


this is an article on Human Trafficking, not on getting a job in a bar

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=186257241

From the looks of things, it just looks like she'll try to force it back into the Angeles City article.

I don't have anything to add where your content dispute is concerned, but I will point out that by golly, you're a good writer.

It seems to me (not really knowing anything about the true situation in that city) like it's an off-wiki dispute with people involved with too many axes to grind; on the one side, somebody whose organization has a vested interest in whipping up a moral panic about prostitution, sex slavery, and related things in that city (and who might thus resort to exaggerating numbers and distorting facts to suit the agenda), versus somebody who's apparently involved in some way with the adult entertainment industry of that city and has an interest in "cleaning up" the public image of the field, perhaps whitewashing or covering up genuine social problems. It would seem to require somebody knowledgeable about that place and its industries (clean and sleazy) but without a personal bias one way or the other to clean up the articles.

Well not really, if you check the sources given in the article the entire thing is one blatant hodge podge of half truths, lies, misrepresentations of people's statements and synthesis. Not so much an off-wiki dispute as your typical garden variety POV pusher.

Lets just watch all the idiots who will be voting keep.

Somewhat predictably:



It's like, all you have to do is provide tons of links to make it look like what you've written has been researched, and people will assume the article is factually accurate without bothering to check the links.

See here: http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=15825&hl

This article is a golden exemple of the uses of the footnoting process to pass trash as encyclopedic. It isen't even merge material. Those who have voted merge should better do reading the sources used to see yet another exemple of trash writting. I don't give much of the worth (in terms of contributions) of the idiots who'd think this article should be kept. The problem isen't even POV, claiming only POV suggest that it can be improved. Had Wikipedia used the referencing system insteed of footnoting it would have been obvious as to why this article should not survive.

You are at least half right. I will be perfectly honest with you. I do go to go-go bars in Angeles. More often than not I am accompanied by my fiance' and some of her friends. The go-go bars here are more like discos and restaurants than they are the go-go bars in America. Both male and female customers will routinely get up and dance with the girls in bikinis. The last time I was in a bar was to watch the Super Bowl at 7 in the morning.

There is prostitution in this city. Some workers in the bar will prostitute themselves. The degree to which that happens is not very clear. There are very poor girls working in a place frequented by relatively extremely rich people. I'm not trying to whitewash anything. What I do not see is any evidence of human trafficking, sex slaves, child prostitutes, illegal recruitment or just about anything else that is in this article. Nobody from the bars are forced to do anything. There is no nudity and certainly no deviant sex acts in the bars as is claimed.

My agenda, if you want to call it that, is to get rid of the fiction so people can see the truth. When I started editing there were outrageous claims such as 150,000 of the 280,000 people in Angeles were prostitutes. There were claims that a woman or child was raped or killed in Angeles every six seconds. Feel free to do the math on that but if I remember correctly it results in the entire population being wiped out in a month. There were claims that AIDS started in Angeles. Claims Angeles is a slum. Claims that 75% of the prostitutes were children as young as 6 years old. The list goes on and on. Much of the outrageous stuff is actually gone now so what remains is the less outrageous misinformation. Perhaps that is even more dangerous because its not glaring obvious that its a hoax anymore.

here's a pic of some sex slaves, some as young as ten years old, performing the deviant act of pillow fighting at one of the over 200 brothels in this slum city. (sarcasm)

A source tells me that Olongapo has a worse reputation than Angeles, but this is very old intelligence (prior to Americans going home).

I would imagine that the departure of the American military and their well known corrupting influence probably improved things dramatically on the moral front, though likely at the expense of the economic front. But that's just me speculating.

At http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Angeles_...pital_and_preda, I see you are operating a "distant learning" business. Your wiki-antagonists appear to be the usual victimology types, who would paint an entire country as pawns of slavers just to draw in a few more Donor Dollars. Oh my biases ... I am not much of a fan of charities, NGOs, and other groups whose only output is a never ending series of depressing videos. Have they done much positive stuff? Some certainly have, but one wonders at what cost...



Aha! This is probably the sort of thing that is rubbing the Wikipediots the wrong way. As Greg Kohs noted recently, there are precious few people at Wikipedia (and, to be fair, almost anywhere) who are willing to take a few seconds to extract the content of an argument if it is wrapped in dripping, scathing, sarcasm. Or if the argument is just the vehicle for some vicious attack.

That is to say, most people are lazy asses when it comes to thinking. The idea that some statements are dual use is lost completely on them. Wikipedia is not only populated with people like this, but their policies naturally select against those who can transcend the delivery and perceive the point.

And that's probably why you have been banned.

This kind of laziness is part of the reason why it is incredibly difficult to argue against people who make their living scaring/shocking the crap out of others, even as they slander an entire city. They are "only trying to help", you know.

I agree with KamrynMatika though, in that the article on human trafficing in Angeles will likely be deleted. The Weighted Companion Cube will probably have to suffer for this though. Such is the Aperture Science Enrichment Center ... oh, excuse me, Wikipedia.

Probably many of them have Asperger's Syndrome and are unable to appreciate sarcasm.

Looks like the article got deleted. Kind of surprising.

thanks for everybody's help in exposing this article. i'm sure there's at least 280,000 people that appreciate it even if they dont know it yet.

We do what we can...

I should say, though, just on an administrative note, that this is one of those threads that should be retitled and maybe also moved to a different subforum. It's a fine example of how one determined, community-minded person tried to do something to correct a serious problem even after being abused, railroaded and banned - and succeeded, using WR as the best-available resource, or a "court of last resort" if you will. (At the risk of sounding waaaay too self-congratulatory.)

The thread title should really be "Angeles City: Slandering entire populations on WP" and it should be in the Articles forum. If there are no objections over the next day or so, I'll probably do just that... OK?

95% agree with that.

Except, it's never "slander" on Wikipedia. Written words are "libel".

Or, you can just use the umbrella term "defamation".

Bingo!! You're just described the typical WP admin. In no other sphere can people without any social IQ whatever, attain such social power.

When it comes to being able to gain influence and power by messing around on computers, many normal primate rules do not apply. (Photo of Bill Gates to illustrate).

- Milt

i have no problems with you changing the title at all. when i first wrote the thread i didnt know how all this would be accepted by the people here. once again, i cant begin to express my surprise at how open minded everyone here. Considering the refusal of some people on wikipedia to accept that Angeles isnt actually completely populated by child prostitutes and pedophiles i didnt expect this outcome.

The original title was based on his story of how he became banned though...

Perhaps I'm just inventing excuses to justify my irrational opposition to retitling threads. I for one would bristle and hiss if one of mine were retitled simply because the conversation got all "useful" or whatever. For future reference, invoking whatever input a thread-starter has on its continued existence, I'd rather any thread of mine that was to be retitled just be deleted.