Wikipediocracy

Retrospect

Peter Damian wrote:who is Rich Wales?

The alleged founder of Wikipedia who's earned a ruddy fortune by giving talks about Wikipedia.

Retrospect

thekohser wrote:Film is expensive.

Yep, and not so easy to come by now everyone uses digital cameras. Hey, did you know if you use a digital camera you can upload pictures you've taken to Commons without even having to print them? Bloody cool!

Retrospect

+1.6504682833 A recording that basically leads with, "We don't regularly check this number!" Yep, but it's a working number. Yep, but it's not a switchboard, and that's what I asked for. There was no receptionist answering the line during business hours. Please don't tell me you're groveling for $2...

Retrospect

thekohser wrote:Send him some photos of enormous-chested women in the soft porn industry. He likes those

So do most men. Is that a ruddy crime?

Retrospect

Anroth wrote:Well it was mostly being kept out of McAlpines until he came out and publicly denounced it.

Come off it. It was all over the bloody Internet. Kept out of the papers, maybe, but any fuckwit who knows how to Google could have found it.

Retrospect

thekohser wrote:
Retrospect wrote: +1.6504682833
A recording that basically leads with, "We don't regularly check this number!"

Yep, but it's a working number.

Retrospect

And how many of them are capable of organising a piss-up in a Fosters lager factory?

Retrospect

Registrant Contact: Quora Domain Admin () Fax: 261 Hamilton Ave Suite 212 Palo Alto, CA 94301 US Administrative Contact: Quora Domain Admin (@quora.com) +1.6504682833 Fax: +1. 261 Hamilton Ave Suite 212 Palo Alto, CA 94301 US Technical Contact: Quora Domain Admin (@quora.com) +1.6504682833 Fax: +1. ...

Retrospect

thekohser wrote:fifteen are of Indian surname (though this is reasonable, given that 25% of Quora users are Indian)

So? What point are you making here?

And what sort of shithead deletes an article on a Nobel Prize winner, even one with a bloody stupid beard?

Retrospect

As I said: "Gibraltarian nationalist" is Gib-speak for "anti-Spanish" :dry: Nope, "Living in Gibraltar" is Gib-speak for "anti-Spanish". As long as the Spanish pursue their bloody colonialist and racist policies against somewhere that's been British for 300 years, in defiance of all ruddy internati...

Retrospect

"Gibraltarian nationalist" is "Gib-speak for "anti-Spanish" Another bloody foreigner who doesn't understand the issues. You can't live in Gibraltar and not be bloody anti-Spanish. The Spanish have no right whatsoever to the place. They signed away their rights 200 years ago and for most of the time...

Retrospect

Tippi Hadron wrote:(credit: Jeanne boleyn. Of course.)

Hey, no fair! The subject of a photo doesn't own the copyright. The photographer does. Please credit the photographer.

Retrospect

CHAMBERSBURG -- A Florida motorcyclist was jailed Friday after he allegedly drove recklessly and fled police in Peters Township while riding a motorcycle with a fraudulent registration. Police said the false license plate was obtained from Wikipedia.org and printed on cardboard. See! Wikipedia is s...

Retrospect

Bloody simple, really. Just change the shithead guidelines so that there are no articles on Z-list celebrities (which is what she is). If Wikipedia were a real encyclopedia, instead of a steaming pile of crap, that's exactly what would happen.

Retrospect

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Herostratus#Gregory_Kohs_and_his_views Happy now? :evilgrin: Hahahaha yes I'd like to join Wikipediocracy. I have to take care of a few things first, such as shaving my scrotum with a rusty soup can lid, which I'm sure would be a lot more pleasant. I ''do'' lo...

Retrospect

thekohser wrote:
Zoloft wrote:"I'm having a pint with me mum."
Or pirates.

Hey, I've often had a pint or two with me nearest and dearest. But with ruddy pirates?

Retrospect

eppur si muove wrote:a sense of guilt is an important quality in good leaders. I can't say that I've noticed guilt playing any part in the leadership of Wikipedia.

Yep, and there aren't many good bloody leaders on Wikipedia, are there? Point proven.

Retrospect

My favourite is Prince Albert, which brings up one of the thousands of ruddy cocks.

Would Queen Victoria have been amused?

Retrospect

How strange: (revert, no gravedancing please) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Badmachine&diff=496605431&oldid=496426897 Didn't last bloody long! http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ABadmachine&diff=497782526&oldid=496605431 So anyway, seems this ghastly editor blocked by ...

Retrospect

DanMurphy wrote:David Boothroyd to the rescue?

Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee ... which is responsible for settling hundreds of editorial disputes every day

Bet that's news to them.

Retrospect

HRIP7 wrote:
EricBarbour wrote:Good work, Andreas. You're now Pubic Enemy No. 1 on the Wiki-Radar.
Pubic enemy? That is worrying.

Means the so-and-so refuses to put a photo of his pubic hairs on Commons, so the fuckwits at Commons hate him.

Retrospect

Bielle wrote:I'd be embarrassed to ask a charity where I have held a senior position to fund me for so trivial a sum as $25.00.

Well, bully for you! But then you're not some bloody wikipediot!

Retrospect

dogbiscuit wrote:
Bielle wrote:Ad all this out of the goodness of their hearts. Sigh.
Feudian slips just keep on giving.

Hey, is that another slip or a bad joke?

Retrospect

iii wrote:You're assuming that the policy has to be crowdsourced.

I'm assuming it will be because that's what happens on WP due to the fuckwits. There's no way to stop it.

I think that this is absolutely the wrong way to do governance.

+1.

Retrospect

I wonder if Jimbo is kicking himself every waking moment for having founded a website worth billions, and yet ending up with nothing. How is that even possible? I mean, Jimbo must really really feel like an idiot, having let billions of dollars slip through his fingers. With all these ex wives and ...

Retrospect

EricBarbour wrote:Why else would the dumb bastards be ready to give Randy Everette the mop again? Talk about not knowing better!

Hey, but they weren't, at least not enough of them. He withdrew.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... PumpkinSky

Retrospect

culeaker wrote:
SB_Johnny wrote:"QuiteUnusual"
Yep, quite an unusual editor in many ways Well, the RfA has lasted for seven days now and it's very close so there's a behind the scenes bureaucrat clusterfuck.

Failed.

Retrospect

dogbiscuit wrote:someone who has to have several hundred pounds worth of computer to participate in Wikipedia

Maybe he only ever uses his work computer and one in his local library?

Retrospect

"NPOV" worship means that Wikipedia-boosters think they welcome all-comers. Even the most depraved racist scumbags who want to prove the racial superiority of the Aryan race. Is there any policy on Wikipedia that says that one isn't allowed to hold to such perverse views and blithely add text that ...

Retrospect

lilburne wrote:OK so that was vandalism. Now how about this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9_%28Damie ... Background

That can't be vandalism. It's been there for bloody ages. Anything that's vandalism is swiftly removed by efficient crowdsourcing of vandal patrollers.

Retrospect

...undeclared alternate accounts are permitted until they are not. Isn't it a truth universally acknowledged that you can't edit WP for long without breaking some bloody rule or other because the shitheads have produced such a web of conflicting and contradictory rules? That's why WP:IAR is essenti...

Retrospect

However, the model of having predominantly white Western middle class hobbyist male geeks develop content is past its best before date. Hey, aren't most reference works, at least in English, written predominantly by white Western middle class males? And sometimes hobbyists, like the Oxford Dictiona...

Retrospect

But is public interest a determinant of what is an encyclopedic topic or should intellectual criteria and ideas of "seriousness" count for more? WP isn't a serious encyclopedia. We all know that. If shitheads prefer reading about obscure sweets to obscure composers, that's how life is. And the bloo...

Retrospect

Hey no, that won't work at all. Suppose English isn't your first language, quite likely in some obscure nationalistic dispute in the ruddy Balkans or Central Asia but might also apply in almost any field. Suppose it's some subject like children's TV programmes where the expert is aged about 10 or le...

Retrospect

It's started and all over the press.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/ ... scientists

Let's see how many shitheads try to mess it up.

And note that the Wikipedia logo is said to be PD.

Retrospect

This Walsh guy was the one carrying water for Wikimedia's tie-up with the Saudi Arabian government a few days ago. Pretty sure he wrote that (nearly unreadable) press release about how wonderful it is to work together with a Saudi Arabian government owned company on freedom of information issues. M...

Retrospect

There is a pilot program this year providing 100 free J-STOR accounts. It was first come-first served and I missed the cut by the time I found out (so much for the alleged dearth of content writers). RfB Fuckwit! Bet most people here would agree that the majority of the JStor applications were from...

Retrospect

Someone tried the same thing on Ablepharon macrostomia syndrome in this diff: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ablepharon_macrostomia_syndrome&diff=222324303&oldid=200741967 but was reverted a few hours later without explanation. Oh, why not, the undoing can still be undone even four years...

Retrospect

Suppose some shithead edits in every year from 2006 to 2011. Do they have a bigger chance of being picked up than someone who only edited in one year, becauuse you start with a random year? And since there were far more Wikipediots editing in 2011 than 2006, does someone who only edited in 2006 have...

Retrospect

Randy from Boise wrote:The fact is that most content creators have no fundamental issue with administrators.

Hey, stop making sensible comments that violate the house POV. You can get banned for that.

Oh wait, this isn't WP!

Retrospect

jeeze, that guy had a hard-on for CoolCat for the better part of a decade, going all the way back to the GAP project, maybe earlier. Talk about persistence! Good luck banning him. :popcorn: Bloody shithead being banned by a load of bloody shitheads! Dog eats dog! Must admit I missed that he's also ...

Retrospect

Quite sad really and so obvious. Two reviewers giving the book only one star pointing out the amateurish plagiarism, and three others giving four stars or more claiming the book is brilliant. The whole reviewers section on Amazon has become a joke. Then of course to add to the ruddy fun you have vo...

Retrospect

Well, there are plenty of exceptions. Charles Matthews is well-known to be a middle-aged twat who deliberately threw away his life to concentrate on Wikipedia. Jmabel is a saner middle-ager,and NYB a [fill in the gap ypurselves].

Retrospect

iii wrote:a singular supplier

Hey, mods, can we please ask everyone to post in English? "Singular" in English doesn't mean "single", it means bloody extraordinary and maybe downright weird. That might describe Wikipedia, come to think of it.

Retrospect

lonza leggiera wrote:
Moonage Daydream wrote:Let's play find the article. Here's the text. You tell me where it is.
Cincinnati_Ben–Gals (T-H-L).

That's whu no bloody BLP policy can ever work. Too many coatracks.

Any passing admins reading this? Strike out the whole shitty paragraph under WP:UNDUE.

Retrospect

He is essentially saying that crowd-sourcing doesn't work for selecting Wikipedia's admins, because many people have unsound opinions. But it's just dandy for writing the internet's main "reference" work. You couldn't make this stuff up. Yes, well, crowdsourcing articles means removing bits from ar...

Retrospect

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/newsfocus/914761-edits-on-winehouse-skrillex-and-wile-e-coyote-the-role-of-a-wikipedian Loads of claptrap from top shithead David Gerard of course, but it concludes on a not unreasonable note. Alan Stevens, media consultant at Mediacoach.co.uk, said: ‘Wikipedia is a great...

Retrospect

Now very upset about a New York Post article claiming he is spending his honeymoon at Branson's island, and that he edited his Wikipedia bio http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jimmy_Wales&diff=516966706&oldid=516490069 . In fairness, the article is completely wrong and seems to be a spo...

Retrospect

One of the problems with Wikipedia is there's no bloody central control. If a dozen people write articles on the same topic but give them different titles, there's nobody and no mechanism to stop them. With luck, someone will notice and plaster {{mergeto}} signs all over the place. This may or may n...

Retrospect

dogbiscuit wrote:It doesn't need rules, it needs people who have a sense of right and wrong.

Hey, let's stick to the art of the possible. Rules on WP are bloody two a penny. Moral people, maybe not so many.

Search found 142 matches