Talk:Criticism of crowdsourcing/Archive 1 - Revision history

MyWikiBiz: Obscuring name (for SEO minimization)

2009-02-17T20:25:16Z

Obscuring name (for SEO minimization)

Krimpet: Please don't leave this here

2008-11-11T05:08:07Z

Please don't leave this here

Sueme: /* "Krimpet" coverup */

2008-10-30T08:11:51Z

"Krimpet" coverup

Deloitte: /* "Krimpet" coverup */

2008-10-26T19:59:28Z

"Krimpet" coverup

Deloitte: /* Blocked from Wikipedia Review */

2008-10-25T05:21:43Z

Blocked from Wikipedia Review

Proabivouac: archived

2008-10-17T21:31:20Z

archived

Moulton: /* Peccadildonic Pastimes */ "Be ye not bamboozled." —The Big Bamboozler

2008-10-13T13:38:00Z

Peccadildonic Pastimes: "Be ye not bamboozled." —The Big Bamboozler

Moulton: /* A lot of words from Blissyu2 */ Question to Blissyu2 regarding his hypotheses regarding Proabiv's state of mind.

2008-10-13T13:33:14Z

A lot of words from Blissyu2: Question to Blissyu2 regarding his hypotheses regarding Proabiv's state of mind.

Blissyu2: /* A lot of words from Blissyu2 */

2008-10-13T09:15:55Z

A lot of words from Blissyu2

Nathan: /* The Importance of Being Nathan */ I don't usually edit archives but I make an exception this time.

2008-10-13T01:07:00Z

The Importance of Being Nathan: I don't usually edit archives but I make an exception this time.

@@ Line 94: / Line 94: @@
 :::::Blissy, the first "correction" of your [http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dpqbn5p_0dvbzkzgt cited reference] reads as follows:
-::::::''At no stage did Mr.Baxter (as Poetlister or otherwise) give the name Giselle Hillman.  The name Giselle Hillman was given [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mindspillage&diff=next&oldid=32464977 once, by Wikipedia user Zordrac in a message to Wikipedia administrator Mindspillage on 23rd December 2005].''
+::::::''At no stage did Mr.Baxter (as Poetlister or otherwise) give the name Gazelle Hillperson.  The name Gazelle Hillperson was given [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mindspillage&diff=next&oldid=32464977 once, by Wikipedia user Zordrac in a message to Wikipedia administrator Mindspillage on 23rd December 2005].''
 :::::Is there evidence one way or the other whether User:Zordrac is another sockpuppet of the author of the PoetGuy Caper?  My reading of [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=20205&view=findpost&p=127804 this post by FT2] leads me to infer that FT2 believed Zordrac to be yet another character in the PoetGuy cast of characters.  Have I misread FT2's analysis?   —[[User:Moulton|Moulton]] 19:30, 11 October 2008 (PDT)
@@ Line 103: / Line 103: @@
 ::::::::That page does not contain any claims by Proabiv.  Please direct me to the place (page and passage therein) where, [http://mywikibiz.com/index.php?title=Talk:Criticism_of_crowdsourcing&diff=71341&oldid=71340 as you write], "''Proabivouac claimed'' that I created the Poetlister identity, based purely on the fact that I had invited Poetlister to use Classmates.com."  I am looking for a page ''written by Proabiv'' and bearing that alleged claim ''in his writing''.  —[[User:Moulton|Moulton]] 14:41, 12 October 2008 (PDT)
-:::::::Actually, the report states that the information was "added by " you, not written by: we'd assumed that when you ''referred'' "Giselle Hillman" of Ilford 2000 to classmates.com, that her name then appeared in her class list.[[User:Proabivouac|Proabivouac]] 14:14, 12 October 2008 (PDT)
+:::::::Actually, the report states that the information was "added by " you, not written by: we'd assumed that when you ''referred'' "Gazelle Hillperson" of Ilford 2000 to classmates.com, that her name then appeared in her class list.[[User:Proabivouac|Proabivouac]] 14:14, 12 October 2008 (PDT)
 Um, User:Zordrac is me.  LOL.  I have used Zordrac since 1996, Blissyu2 since 1998 and Cat since 1992.  I have said on many places that they are all the same person.  Most of the rest of the time, I use my real name (usually just my first name), Adrian.  There are other people that use the name "Zordrac", many other people that use the name "Cat", and a few other people that use the name "Blissyu2" (mostly impersonators - for example Blissyu2 on Wikipedia is not me, but rather was created by probably Antaeus Feldspar or Longhair to impersonate me).  However, I can confirm that indeed User:Zordrac on Wikipedia is the same person as Blissyu2 on Wikipedia Review.

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:08, 11 November 2008
Line 335:		Line 335:

	: I have begun [[Wikipedia Review]] here. [[User:Ockham\|Ockham]] 03:22, 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 "Homey," 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)
−
−	~~: I've posted a response (of sorts) to these claims [[Directory talk:The Wikipedia Point of View/Wikipedia Review (Criticism)\|here]]. ''Enjoy!'' [[User:Sueme\|Somey]] 01:11, 30 October 2008 (PDT)~~

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:11, 30 October 2008
Line 349:		Line 349:

	::: 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)		::: 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)
		+
		+	: I've posted a response (of sorts) to these claims [[Directory talk:The Wikipedia Point of View/Wikipedia Review (Criticism)\|here]]. ''Enjoy!'' [[User:Sueme\|Somey]] 01:11, 30 October 2008 (PDT)

@@ Line 342: / Line 342: @@
 "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)
+The reason this was covered up is very likely that "Krimpet", like "Poetlister" and "Homey," 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)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:21, 25 October 2008
Line 333:		Line 333:

	==Blocked from Wikipedia Review==		==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)		: I have begun [[Wikipedia Review]] here. [[User:Ockham\|Ockham]] 03:22, 13 October 2008 (PDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:31, 17 October 2008
Line 331:		Line 331:

	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)

@@ Line 151: / Line 151: @@
 ::[[User:Moulton|Moulton]] 08:06, 12 October 2008 (PDT)
 :::As much as I believed in this statement, I am regretfully coming to conclude that "It does not exist to corrupt, but to expose corruption…" may not be the case. Specifically, liars like Mr. Baxter are welcome so long as they oppose certain Wikipedia administrators.[[User:Proabivouac|Proabivouac]] 14:18, 12 October 2008 (PDT)
 ==Joe the outcast of WR responds to elitist dribble mongers==

@@ Line 125: / Line 125: @@
 :::Would you quit it, Blissyu2? Just explain what happened. You "invited" Poetlister to the site. Okay. Why did you invite him?[[User:Proabivouac|Proabivouac]] 14:20, 12 October 2008 (PDT)
 ::::As I said, and as you know unless you are claiming complete and utter stupidity, it automatically invites everyone in your e-mail inbox.  I had been e-mailing Poetlister, duh, in relation to the ban.  I actually had no idea that Poetlister had ever made an account until your lying statement.  Try signing up yourself.  [[User:Blissyu2|Blissyu2]] 02:15, 13 October 2008 (PDT)
 == [[Directory:The_Wikipedia_Point_of_View | The Wikipedia Point of View]] ==

@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 '''PW:'''  The whole idea of "crowd sourcing" as it relates to Wikis is a fallacy.  First of all, not everyone has access to a computer and of those that do, not everyone is necessarily able to forcibly vehicle their point of view effectively against the "Voice of the Crowd".  The demographics of Wikipedia already show the inherent problems with calling what is produced "the sum of all human knowledge" as there are clearly elements of the subset of humans who are not present in the demographics of Wikipedia. So, what is happening in Web 2.0 is clearly not "crowd" sourcing, but the re-enforcement of the idea that "we are those who define reality".  It's a celebration of "Us", which implies a "them" and the division that this implies.  The WP:En experience serves very well as a test case for this hypothesis. So, perhaps the "crowd sourcing" angle is too limitative and not the entire phenomenon?
-==The Importance of Being Nathan==
+== On real-world qualifications/authentication==
 '''NR:''' I actually do not have two of the things that you mention (I've expanded on this via e-mail).  Anyway, that's a better idea for a domain name. It's more descriptive in terms of what the site would actually do. I don't know what I was thinking, really. I also agree, it's probably not possible (or prudent) to use "Wikipedia" as part of the domain name.  —&nbsp;[[User:Nathan|<span style="color:#3971DE">'''Nathan'''</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Nathan|<span style="color:#3971DE">'''talk'''</span>]])</sup> <sub>/ <em>22:39, 8 October 2008 (UTC)</em></sub>