Wikipediocracy

enwikibadscience

Could somebody please provide some evidences to prove that there are Wikipedia whistleblowers who are/were treated badly? Lol. My posts about Cwmhiraeth . The standard on en.Wikipedia is to shoot the messenger. Colonel Henry knew exactly how welcome his threats to me were. And Cwmhiraeth continues ...

enwikibadscience

Colfax Avenue I lost track of why I went there as I slogged through the opening paragraph then came upon this pair of gem sentences (so, I have to post in crap articles, even though I can't bring myself to read the article, because it is two sentences, not, therefore, one of Wikipedia's worst). "Pl...

enwikibadscience

Welcome Boing!

enwikibadscience

I'm sure the contributors at the Encyclopedia Britannica frequently called each other cunts during the construction of the encyclopedia, it's an important part of the process. In all seriousness, isn't the point of the whole civility thing just an attempt for editors to treat each other as they wou...

enwikibadscience

However, like on en.Wikipedia, when it's the admins throwing the word around, who knows. I would say that at minimum, to trigger a warning or suspension the word has to be directed at one or more individuals, or possibly groups thereof if you wanted to be strict about it. Mr. Zoloft wasn't directin...

enwikibadscience

But it often is more than "just using an offensive word to insult someone." That is my point. It is an offensive word also used to demean women as a whole. "Shithead" and "douchebag" aren't used prejudicially against people of a certain gender, race, religion or other often minority status. If you ...

enwikibadscience

iii wrote:
enwikibadscience wrote:
iii wrote:.... You also missed that the pejorative adjective employed is needlessly and, I would say, inflammatorily sexist. ....
That is missed a lot. And pointing it out qualifies you as a militant feminist, if not more.
Are you trying to flatter me?

For stating the obvious? Always.

enwikibadscience

.... If he did it consciously to get PC minds aflutter, it would have been a troll — but a poorly conceived one. But, per usual, this is just a case of obnoxious thoughtlessness, which seems to be a particular specialty of Eric's... .... RfB You could be right. This is much of the problem with call...

enwikibadscience

Vigilant wrote:....

It's trolling in the original and purest sense of the word.

....

Yes, but everyone keeps saying Eric is being provoked to troll. No. He's trolling because he wants to, like all trolls.

enwikibadscience

iii wrote:.... You also missed that the pejorative adjective employed is needlessly and, I would say, inflammatorily sexist. ....

That is missed a lot. And pointing it out qualifies you as a militant feminist, if not more.

enwikibadscience

BWilkins and I have often disagreed, and he likely has blocked me (or at least supported blocks) in the past. Yet, here again, BWilkins / DangerousPanda displayed admirable backbone, humility (in presenting the ANI consensus rather than his ego), and calmness. Perhaps those who objected to my endor...

enwikibadscience

Vigilant wrote:
Also, I'm not sure why Risker has her tongue buried to the small intestine in the WMF's ass, but she's offered a load of useless tripe as evidence that should get trimmed out by a clerk.

You read it?

enwikibadscience

The background here is that for around a year, newbies who generally don't know what they're doing have been showing up in the race and intelligence topic, and I've somehow acquired a reputation as someone who can give them valuable advice. In some cases I can't figure out how these people know any...

enwikibadscience

The background here is that for around a year, newbies who generally don't know what they're doing have been showing up in the race and intelligence topic, and I've somehow acquired a reputation as someone who can give them valuable advice. In some cases I can't figure out how these people know any...

enwikibadscience

Except it's not drivel. You also need to work on your comprehension skills, or else stick to reading things written in words of one syllable. Me, too, then. Because it is without meaning. Tell me when you've retrained as a programmer. Until then, I'll write off biology stuff that I don't understand...

enwikibadscience

The point is that while all the words are reasonably common and everyday, they are being used as part of a management consultancy piece of drivel, often with a slightly different meaning from the one that I (and probably most people here) would think they had. Except it's not drivel. You also need ...

enwikibadscience

Anyone that can't write in a plain natural language and instead resort to a string meaningless bullshit phrases doesn't understand what they are doing. I think you need to upgrade your vocabulary, because that was all pretty basic stuff. The point is that while all the words are reasonably common a...

enwikibadscience

To some extent this may seem quite reasonable and even intuitive, but the reality is that in most product-development efforts, nobody sets any priorities at all, everyone takes on a task that they personally want (which could take anywhere from a few hours to several years), and there's all sorts o...

enwikibadscience

defines "a flexible, holistic product development strategy where a development team works as a unit to reach a common goal", challenges assumptions of the " traditional, sequential approach " to product development, and enables teams to self-organize by encouraging physical co-location or close onl...

enwikibadscience

This is Wikipedia in a nutshell: genuine research mixed with completely unreliable information in such a way that looking at any Wikipedia article the reader never knows what is correct and what is made up. It’s the fabled wisdom of the crowds! This is Cwmhiraeth in a nutshell. Most medical article...

enwikibadscience

This is actually quite juicy. Lilly and Pfizer, two of the biggest (and sleaziest) drug manufacturers, have been up to no good on Wikipedia since its early days. And I don't see any Wikipedians, much less Heilman and his gang of monkeys, doing anything about it in an organized way--or even talking ...

enwikibadscience

This is Wikipedia in a nutshell: genuine research mixed with completely unreliable information in such a way that looking at any Wikipedia article the reader never knows what is correct and what is made up. It’s the fabled wisdom of the crowds! This is Cwmhiraeth in a nutshell. Most medical article...

enwikibadscience

lilburne wrote:
Ming wrote:Wikipedia errors tend to be protected by a lack of scrutiny and skepticism.
I think you mean "Wikipedia errors tend to be protected by ignorant schmucks."

+1

enwikibadscience

Sorry it took this user so/too long to understand it... :bow: Though the use of the first person seemed overwhelming at first sight, reaching 39 appeared impossible until a few minutes ago, after counting the possessive and other related 1st person words... Sorry to bother (or be boring you) again ...

enwikibadscience

Capsot wrote: See you and have a great weekend,
Claudi/Capsot

+1

enwikibadscience

Hi, If "39" was the numbers of mistakes I made (which is worse than I would have thought), could you please tell me (at least some of them) so I can improve my command. Thank you! Have a nice day! Claudi/Capsot PS: Mmm, could it be the lack of commas... sorry about that, shouldn't try to write whil...

enwikibadscience

When someone at Wikipedia writes about "all of those banned users at Wikipediocracy" they're not interested in the truth of that statement. They're interested in dismissing all criticism as motivated by pettiness and revenge-seeking among children who were so naughty they had be BANNINATED! I belie...

enwikibadscience

So much press! Johansson works as an administrator, and has degrees in linguistics, civil engineering, economics and particle physics, The Verge reported. He covers a wide range of articles on various topics such as bugs, beetles, and butterflies, and is reportedly particularly proud of his work hi...

enwikibadscience

Tony's now lumping anyone who disagrees with him into the evil Wikipediocracy conspiracy . Oookay then. Cullen328 responds admirably . Don't template the regulars, because they can dish it out, but they can't take it. Tony1 hindered access for hearing impaired users. Whatever he bloviates in disagr...

enwikibadscience

A clumsy attempt to close the loop. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=616239603#I_would_like_to_report_user:daniellagreen_for_doing_paid_editing_with_nondisclosure_to_wikipedia_as_is_the_current_policy. The next one won't be so bald. I...

enwikibadscience

In 2012, they doled out just about $2.2 million, but across more than 1,250 recipients . I'm seriously talking about $25 checks disbursed to things like United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, The Petco Foundation, Seniors First, and Freedom Alliance. Is it possible that this is an employee-d...

enwikibadscience

The CNA Financial article got me to snooping a bit more. Wikipedia has this completely unsourced information: CNA Foundation The CNA Foundation contributes millions of dollars to community development via funding programs and civic involvement. The primary focuses are: * Meeting the educational nee...

enwikibadscience

Vigilant wrote:
....

P.P.S. You've managed to make everyone else on the signpost talk page look mature and eminent by comparison. Good job.

....

Is there a barnstar for that?

enwikibadscience

Expect a future in which all health information Wikipedia [sic] is the most accurate available in every language and backed by medical consensus of every authority.

From WikiProject Pamphlets or some such.

I don't.

enwikibadscience

Can we have a special snowflake smiley?

(And can a mod make this smaller?)

enwikibadscience

Anroth wrote:
....

I disagree. Tony clearly had a discussion (or so he says) with the signpost editorial staff about his expections for his

Frankly I am more annoyed at the editor in chief for even making a backroom deal like that with Tony in the first place.

Good point.

enwikibadscience

It doesn't help much to look back and fault people, but I'll do so enough to remark that if Tony1's position had been treated with respect and constructiveness from the beginning, the situation never would've turned into this horrible angry mess in which I really believe he and others are acting in...

enwikibadscience

Kelly Martin wrote:Wikipedia is absolutely terrible at conflict management.

Yes, in all ways. Cannot be said enough.

enwikibadscience

Neotarf, you mentioned above having discussed this matter by e-mail, and have said on Wikipedia that some of the e-mails you received were abusive. Who are you alleging sent you abusive e-mails? From his block log Tony1 may have done this before, although quite some time ago, abused email privilege...

enwikibadscience

I find it fascinating that this affair has brought a number of Deaf and hearing-impaired editors to identify themselves as such. I can understand that perhaps they chose not to do so until now because it didn't seem necessary in a text-based environment; but as soon as audio media became prominentl...

enwikibadscience

The upshot of all this is probably that a template will be created to place on top of all temporarily-audio-only Signpost interviews, asking users to please not post their own transcripts prior to a certain date without advance permission. Or they could make a template asking editors who are Specia...

enwikibadscience

The upshot of all this is probably that a template will be created to place on top of all temporarily-audio-only Signpost interviews, asking users to please not post their own transcripts prior to a certain date without advance permission. Or they could make a template asking editors who are Specia...

enwikibadscience

Of the many things that gets in the way of congenial discourse and administrative competence in WP is the anti-social attitudes of many established WP participants. Because most, if not all, of we WPO members actually are able to have thriving and productive relationships in our workplaces, we unde...

enwikibadscience

The exact details are murky, but no one is denying that there was an agreement with Tony to the effect that the SP staff would not publish a transcript for at least a couple of days. But the transcript was not produced by the staff, it was produced spontaneously by the community. At that point it b...

enwikibadscience

How is it disenfranchising readers with special needs if the transcript is posted a week later? :picard: Tony said at the beginning of the discussion that the Signpost would be happy to make a transcript available to the hearing impaired. Of course this imposes an additional burden on the hearing-i...

enwikibadscience

Hex wrote:
Poetlister wrote: Why don't you post that under his comment? He'd be more likely to see it there.
Posting this seemed more practical.

lol

enwikibadscience

How is it disenfranchising readers with special needs if the transcript is posted a week later? :picard: Tony said at the beginning of the discussion that the Signpost would be happy to make a transcript available to the hearing impaired. Of course this imposes an additional burden on the hearing-i...

enwikibadscience

The alternative is, to borrow a phrase from Vigilant, to "put on his big boy pants" and admit that he made a mistake. Namely, not thinking it through in advance sufficiently to realize that his special deal would disenfranchise readers with special needs. And after that to allow the transcript link...

enwikibadscience

Tony is a good journalist. No, he really isn't. He's not bad. He's an improvement on most of the writers in the same stable. But if he were any good, he'd be doing it in his real job in the real world. This tendency for Wikimedians to equate "does a lot of work for us" with "good" shits me to tears...

enwikibadscience

Tony is a good journalist. No, he really isn't. He's not bad. He's an improvement on most of the writers in the same stable. But if he were any good, he'd be doing it in his real job in the real world. This tendency for Wikimedians to equate "does a lot of work for us" with "good" shits me to tears...

Search found 1113 matches