269
edits
Changes
MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Sunday November 24, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to searchTalk:Criticism of crowdsourcing/Archive 1 (view source)
Revision as of 21:31, 17 October 2008
, 21:31, 17 October 2008archived
Wikipedia Review has, through its history, been overrun with interpersonal conflict disrupting the actual criticism. Ultimately, people are going to disagree, and really, who cares? So long as they aren't doing anything illegal, does it really matter? Most of the interpersonal conflict issues, though, were started by people trying to destroy the site. I really see no reason why they should even be included in the site at all. No Wikipedia administrators allowed. No vehemently pro-Wikipedia people allowed. Nobody who hates the site allowed. Why allow it? Just have people that are trying to help the site. Less interpersonal conflict then, and it is more genuine. Then you can encourage people who are good for the site, and people who love Wikipedia can quite simply go elsewhere. [[User:Blissyu2|Blissyu2]] 20:51, 11 October 2008 (PDT)
Wikipedia Review has, through its history, been overrun with interpersonal conflict disrupting the actual criticism. Ultimately, people are going to disagree, and really, who cares? So long as they aren't doing anything illegal, does it really matter? Most of the interpersonal conflict issues, though, were started by people trying to destroy the site. I really see no reason why they should even be included in the site at all. No Wikipedia administrators allowed. No vehemently pro-Wikipedia people allowed. Nobody who hates the site allowed. Why allow it? Just have people that are trying to help the site. Less interpersonal conflict then, and it is more genuine. Then you can encourage people who are good for the site, and people who love Wikipedia can quite simply go elsewhere. [[User:Blissyu2|Blissyu2]] 20:51, 11 October 2008 (PDT)
==Blocked from Wikipedia Review==
I'm not certain if this is on-topic or not, but I've been [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=20679&view=findpost&p=135577 blocked from Wikipedia Review] for revealing that long-time poster [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=1066 "Heat"] is in fact the dishonest and corrupt Wikipedia adminstrator/sockpuppeteer [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Formeruser-82 "Homeontherange"], a.k.a. [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=%22andy+lehrer%22+socialist&spell=1 Andy Lehrer, Canadian socialist activist:] Wikipedia Review welcomed and protects this inveterate liar solely because he opposes SlimVirgin and Jayjg (diffs forthcoming).
It also seems probable that the new poster [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=8587 desiderat] is yet another sockpuppet of Andy Lehrer.
I would like to verify that exposing the leadership of Wikipedia Review to scrutiny, as well as that of Wikipedia, is a valid goal for this site.[[User:Proabivouac|Proabivouac]] 01:22, 13 October 2008 (PDT)
: I have begun [[Wikipedia Review]] here. [[User:Ockham|Ockham]] 03:22, 13 October 2008 (PDT)
=="Krimpet" coverup==
Let's also observe that Wikipedia Review has covered up the identity of male transvestite [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Krimpet"Krimpet"] (a.k.a. Francis "Francine" S. Rogers,) a Wikipedia administrator known for outing others and attacking their BLPs, by [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=20613&view=findpost&p=135471 deleting an entire thread].
"Krimpet," like "Poetlister" and others is a male tranvestite pretending to be a woman: [http://people.rit.edu/~fsr3886/], [http://people.rit.edu/~fsr3886/resume.pdf],[http://pear.php.net/user/krimpet], [http://www.linkedin.com/pub/9/541/117]
The reason this was covered up is very likely that "Krimpet", like "Poetlister" and "Homeontherange," opposes SlimVirgin (an actual woman, not a [http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=dd7ss2g_0fshgw6hq&hl=en tranvestite as per the Review's staff]) and Jayjg.[[User:Proabivouac|Proabivouac]] 03:53, 13 October 2008 (PDT)
: OK how we deal with this is by the MWB 'directory' system. I have created [[Directory:The Wikipedia Point of View/Wikipedia Review (Criticism)]] which contains any potentially defamatory information. I am responsible for this directory, and only I have passworded access to it. You can create your own directory if you wish. We can share each others' material if we wish. Mainspace material such as [[Wikipedia Review]] must be verifiable and sourced in a similar way to [[Wikipedia]] itself. [[User:Ockham|Ockham]] 04:04, 13 October 2008 (PDT)
::Whether KRIMPET, POETLISTER are TRANIES, CROSS DRESSES, DYKE'S OR FAIRES has really no bearing on Wikipeida in so much as These people have hurt others with the way they have used Wikipeida as a weapon of revenge and vindictive pursuits.[[User:Joehazelton|Joehazelton]] 04:35, 13 October 2008 (PDT)
::: This is why I suggest using the 'Directory' system for such material, if it is felt necessary (I am mildly intrigued by this sort of tabloid material). Reliable, sober and well-sourced material that would be useful to the more respectable journals, and of course to the [[Sloan Foundation]] can go in mainspace. [[User:Ockham|Ockham]] 04:56, 13 October 2008 (PDT)
