StoneToss (split from "Missing Articles")

[Giraffe Stapler]

Some people have been trying to create a Wikipedia article for far-right cartoonist StoneToss for years. It's been created and deleted and created again and deleted again but it never seemed to have enough coverage to stick. Perhaps his time has finally come:

Boing Boing: Nazi cartoonist meets the Streisand Effect after Twitter censors discussion of his identity
Daily Dot: Author of far-right comic StoneToss allegedly doxed by left-wing reporting collective

[Giraffe Stapler]

Some people have been trying to create a Wikipedia article for far-right cartoonist StoneToss for years. It's been created and deleted and created again and deleted again but it never seemed to have enough coverage to stick. Perhaps his time has finally come:

Boing Boing: Nazi cartoonist meets the Streisand Effect after Twitter censors discussion of his identity
Daily Dot: Author of far-right comic StoneToss allegedly doxed by left-wing reporting collective

Well, how about that? No sooner did I post this than a StoneToss (T-H-L) article appeared and has already been deleted. Coincidence? Probably. Someone registered CoolidgeCalvin (T-C-L) a few days ago, before StoneToss' identity was revealed and it sure doesn't seem like they were interested in StoneToss' real name.

It did lead to this ANI discussion neutrally titled "Primarily on Wikipedia to launder neo-nazi cartoonist". I grabbed archives of the article and talk page. if anyone is super interested.

[Hemiauchenia]

Some people have been trying to create a Wikipedia article for far-right cartoonist StoneToss for years. It's been created and deleted and created again and deleted again but it never seemed to have enough coverage to stick. Perhaps his time has finally come:

Boing Boing: Nazi cartoonist meets the Streisand Effect after Twitter censors discussion of his identity
Daily Dot: Author of far-right comic StoneToss allegedly doxed by left-wing reporting collective

Well, how about that? No sooner did I post this than a StoneToss (T-H-L) article appeared and has already been deleted. Coincidence? Probably. Someone registered CoolidgeCalvin (T-C-L) a few days ago, before StoneToss' identity was revealed and it sure doesn't seem like they were interested in StoneToss' real name.

It did lead to this ANI discussion neutrally titled "Primarily on Wikipedia to launder neo-nazi cartoonist". I grabbed archives of the article and talk page. if anyone is super interested.

I was thinking about mentioning ST on the Twitter thread as another example of Twitter's decline under Elon Musk. Despite the fact that under Musk the number of support staff and thus dealing with harassment has plummeted, Twitter has gone to great lengths to redact. ST's real identity despite the fact that he is a far right racist and antisemite.

[AndyTheGrump]

Twitter has gone to great lengths to redact. ST's real identity despite the fact that he is a far right racist and antisemite.

'Because of', not 'despite'...

[Hemiauchenia]

Twitter has gone to great lengths to redact. ST's real identity despite the fact that he is a far right racist and antisemite.

'Because of', not 'despite'...

Yeah, that was implied. Musk has previously retweeted one of StoneToss's comics and he regularly tweets far right nonsense now.

[Giraffe Stapler]

And StoneToss is back. I'm going to bite my tongue on this except to say that everyone involved in this needs to take a step back.

[Giraffe Stapler]

From the administrators' noticeboard:

Alleged doxing of users and other concerns

Benchmarkingsalad (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has made a number of edits warning other users that they are targets of doxing efforts by Kiwifarms. The alleged doxing is related to StoneToss. I do not know if these allegations are legit and if the user (who openly admits their account is a "throwaway" to protect their own identity) is correct. I am AGF that Benchmarkingsalad is doing what they believe to be correct and helpful.

I am hoping some other admins can take a look at this. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:48, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that's definitely a real thing and not some obvious trolling.

MODS: Maybe a mod could move the StoneToss stuff to it's own thread?

Moderator's Note: Done.

[Ron Lybonly]

See:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/StoneToss (T-H-L)

[Ryuichi]

See:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/StoneToss (T-H-L)

Some profoundly weak !(!votes) there.

[Vigilant]

What an utter piece of shit this guy is.

[Alalch Emis]

... everyone involved in this needs to take a step back.

I don't know if I am more concerned about being doxed on Kiwi Farms or being "investigated" by viewtopic.php?f=6&p=347050#p347050

[Giraffe Stapler]

... everyone involved in this needs to take a step back.

I don't know if I am more concerned about being doxed on Kiwi Farms or being "investigated" by viewtopic.php?f=6&p=347050#p347050

Are you still banned from "post-1992 American politics, broadly construed"? Anything that is a culture wars hot button should be considered part of "broadly construed", shouldn't it?

[Alalch Emis]

Certainly should, but I am not topic banned anymore. Got no strong interest in Amerian politics. I encountered this page (its made-to-troll predecessor that El_C G4'd) doing new page review. I am interested in "borderline" topics that seem unlikely to receive suitable encyclopedic treatment, but can, in fact, get such coverage with a little bit of focused effort. Some of those topics are political, but some are superficially dubious things like Nogger (T-H-L) or Suicide by jumping from height (T-H-L).

Edit: Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center (T-H-L) which I almost entirely wrote and which was previously believed to be a hoax is maybe a better example. And of course, my favourite article: Twosday (T-H-L).

[Giraffe Stapler]

I was lucky (unlucky?) enough to catch the latest round of low effort threats over this.

Language warning

Simon McNeil is Simonm223
@Simonm223: is an obese, Amerimutt-looking Canadian known aa Simon McNeil. (Stop getting the goyslop at Tim Hortons, eh.) @Pbritti: is Michael Patrick Britti of Colorado. This isn't even mentioning the other lolcows like MrCollie, UwUTroony, 66spazatron, KlayCock, No courage, Troony328, YourMomSucks, and the other degenerates, this doxxing is going to be a lot of fun. People deserve to know who is supporting troony activism in all of its evil and wretched forms. More doxxes incoming on talk. Ahhhhhhhhhh they're trooooooooooning.

Ahhhhhhhhhh I'm trooooooooooning.

@Alalch E:, @Isi96:, @MrOllie:, @KlayCax:, @TROPtastic:, @Elspea756:, @Justarandomamerican:, @Schierbecker:, @TarnishedPath:, @Carrite:, @Bon courage:, @Hahnchen:, @GranCavallo:.

Jews cause troonies and mutilate penises. ProudRedskin (talk) 13:51, 24 March 2024 (UTC) [reply]

I was disappointed to find that there isn't actually a Wikipedia user named YourMomSucks.

[Giraffe Stapler]

More. Looks like this was happening on the AFD page until it was protected. I guess you can't protect a page that doesn't exist, only salt it?

more bad language

How's the goyslop?​
Hi troony activists and the other losrs that infest this cesspool.

@Simonm223: is an obese, Amerimutt-looking Canadian known aa Simon McNeil. (Stop getting the goyslop at Tim Hortons, eh.) @Pbritti: is Michael Patrick Britti of Colorado. This isn't even mentioning the other lolcows like MrCollie, UwUTroony, 66spazatron, KlayCock, No courage, Troony328, YourMomSucks, and the other degenerates, this doxxing is going to be a lot of fun. People deserve to know who is supporting troony activism in all of its evil and wretched forms. More doxxes incoming on talk.

Ahhhhhhhhhh I'm trooooooooooning.

Nice attend at a IP block. You do realize this is a virtual machine that mimics an Android and IPhone, right? Fookin' idiots. Yellowskin28 (talk) 14:47, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I'll simply change the range. Idiots. I can do this for months and months for atime its so beautiful hahah Yellowskin28 (talk) 14:49, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

And spreading to user talk pages now. This looks like the work of one person, so they will get frustrated and stop soon as their efforts keep getting deleted and they see no one is panicking.

[Sennalen]

I haven't been keeping score here. Are the bad people wanting it deleted or not deleted?

[Giraffe Stapler]

I haven't been keeping score here. Are the bad people wanting it deleted or not deleted?

There are very fine people on both sides.

There have been several attempts over the years to have a StoneToss Wikipedia article. I think the fact that he's a terrible person and the association with the alt-right made a lot of people reluctant to support that. Plus, not a lot of mainstream news coverage until his identity was revealed.

So now there an unnecessarily long Wikipedia article detailing what a terrible person he is. Some of the Wikipedia power players want to keep it now and it will very likely be kept, another permanently protected article that people like Larry Sanger can use to show how biased Wikipedia is. Good work, everyone.

[Elinruby]

Gotta give the guy credit tho for "goyslop from Tim Hortons eh"

I have no idea about the rest of it

[Randy from Boise]

I haven't been keeping score here. Are the bad people wanting it deleted or not deleted?

It's an easy GNG pass, there should be an article.

Hopefully, in the long run, the article will not suck ass — but that's neither here nor there with respect to an AfD debate.

t

[Mojito]

It's an easy GNG pass, there should be an article.

Hopefully, in the long run, the article will not suck ass — but that's neither here nor there with respect to an AfD debate.

t

Ahh the classic "this article sucks, but hopefully someday it won't" situation.

[Alalch Emis]

But, incidentally, it doesn't suck.

[Kraken]

Appears to be a pretty blatant breach of BLP and possibly NPOV on a skim reading.

Clearly no standalone notability as either an artist, artistic work or controversy. The NBC News report shows the issue. The wider story is Twitter policy, and even though it is claimed (and disputed) that the artist is the direct impetus for a policy change, they get very little space in the report. And what it does say carefully balances the news value with the obvious risks.

What it literally says about "Stonetoss" as a comic/artist can be summed up in one line. Stonetoss is an antisemitic cartoonist whose strips are extreme and often attract millions of views on X. That's it. No context. Not even to say where that ranks on a platform the rest of the report makes clear has become openly welcoming to antisemitic content under the guise of free speech.

So the notional topic is cleary Twitter and the wider debate about free speech and online harms. If it didn't have its own article, would it get air time in those wider topics? There's only one Banksy. There's quite probably a fuck load of these people out there. If not, where's the huge amounts of coverage of this one that you would expect? It really isn't explained by a desire to no platform. Outlets aren't shy about naming and shaming antisemites. It's gold.

It looks and smells like something very bad. It's always a bad sign when the Anonymous Comrades Collective (T-H-L), who Wikipedia happily admits in this article are "antifascist internet vigilantes", don't even have their own article. But here's Wikipedia seemingly giving them a helping hand in their efforts. Putting the megaphone to work.

[The Garbage Scow]

The internet is such rubbish.

[Giraffe Stapler]

It looks and smells like something very bad. It's always a bad sign when the Anonymous Comrades Collective (T-H-L), who Wikipedia happily admits in this article are "antifascist internet vigilantes", don't even have their own article. But here's Wikipedia seemingly giving them a helping hand in their efforts. Putting the megaphone to work.

You're mad that antifascist internet vigilantes get a shout-out for unmasking a Neo-Nazi? Huh.

[Randy from Boise]

It's an easy GNG pass, there should be an article.

Hopefully, in the long run, the article will not suck ass — but that's neither here nor there with respect to an AfD debate.

t

Ahh the classic "this article sucks, but hopefully someday it won't" situation.

Sucking or not sucking isn't part of the Notability-determination process.

t

[Sennalen]

"No version of this article could possibly satisfy policy" is a valid deletion argument. That was the reasoning in the AfD that inspired the creation of WP:FRINGE. Not sure if that's the case here, but I wouldn't rule it out

[greenday61892]

It looks and smells like something very bad. It's always a bad sign when the Anonymous Comrades Collective (T-H-L), who Wikipedia happily admits in this article are "antifascist internet vigilantes", don't even have their own article. But here's Wikipedia seemingly giving them a helping hand in their efforts. Putting the megaphone to work.

You're mad that antifascist internet vigilantes get a shout-out for unmasking a Neo-Nazi? Huh.

Is the mask slipping?

[Giraffe Stapler]

Sucking or not sucking isn't part of the Notability-determination process.

True, but it does determine if you get backstage at a Mötley Crüe Band show.*
I would like to apologize for this joke, which is not funny and also factually inaccurate. Specifically, I would like to apologize to the members of Mötley Crüe Band. Mötley Crüe Band in no way condones any type of sexist or coercive behaviour towards their loyal fan community.

[Kraken]

It looks and smells like something very bad. It's always a bad sign when the Anonymous Comrades Collective (T-H-L), who Wikipedia happily admits in this article are "antifascist internet vigilantes", don't even have their own article. But here's Wikipedia seemingly giving them a helping hand in their efforts. Putting the megaphone to work.

You're mad that antifascist internet vigilantes get a shout-out for unmasking a Neo-Nazi? Huh.

Are you suggesting this should be the purpose of Wikipedia?

Giving shout outs to vigilantes doesn't seem like a good idea to me at all.

Both on general principle, and specifically now, when there are quite a few of these pencil necked keyboard warrior types who think it's the Isrealis who are the new Nazis. Could get quite confusing for anyone tasked with manning the WP:MIXINGDESK.

YO YO YO MISTER WIKI ON THE ONES AND TWOS GIVING OUT MUCH LOVE TO THE RAFAH MASSIVE HEAR ME NOW

[Midsize Jake]

Are you suggesting this should be the purpose of Wikipedia?

Giving shout outs to vigilantes doesn't seem like a good idea to me at all.

Nobody said anything about "purpose," and besides, they're internet vigilantes, not vigilantes in the conventional (i.e., physically violent) sense. What's more, you'll probably wish you'd been a little more circumspect about this a couple of years from now, when they smash through your front door and drag you off to the local "reconditioning camp" for having insultingly compared mere internet vigilantes with real, honest-to-goodness right-wing green-shirted "alpha male" thugs.

[Giraffe Stapler]

It looks and smells like something very bad. It's always a bad sign when the Anonymous Comrades Collective (T-H-L), who Wikipedia happily admits in this article are "antifascist internet vigilantes", don't even have their own article. But here's Wikipedia seemingly giving them a helping hand in their efforts. Putting the megaphone to work.

You're mad that antifascist internet vigilantes get a shout-out for unmasking a Neo-Nazi? Huh.

Are you suggesting this should be the purpose of Wikipedia?

Giving shout outs to vigilantes doesn't seem like a good idea to me at all.

You know, I just checked and they're not even named in the article, so you're mad at something that didn't even happen, which seems true to form for you.

I see no problem with naming the group that did the unmasking - it's part of the story and they are named in all of the news reports that I have seen. That's just a normal part of writing a summary of the situation. Besides, I'm a fan of their earlier work and I look forward to more of the same.

[Kraken]

It looks and smells like something very bad. It's always a bad sign when the Anonymous Comrades Collective (T-H-L), who Wikipedia happily admits in this article are "antifascist internet vigilantes", don't even have their own article. But here's Wikipedia seemingly giving them a helping hand in their efforts. Putting the megaphone to work.

You're mad that antifascist internet vigilantes get a shout-out for unmasking a Neo-Nazi? Huh.

Are you suggesting this should be the purpose of Wikipedia?

Giving shout outs to vigilantes doesn't seem like a good idea to me at all.

You know, I just checked and they're not even named in the article, so you're mad at something that didn't even happen, which seems true to form for you.

I see no problem with naming the group that did the unmasking - it's part of the story and they are named in all of the news reports that I have seen. That's just a normal part of writing a summary of the situation. Besides, I'm a fan of their earlier work and I look forward to more of the same.

I don't object to Wikipedia naming the group, I object to them "writing a summary of the situation" as a standalone article. Where this non-notable group appears to be getting UNDUE attention. If the NBC News link is representative.

I took it as read that anyone wishing to comment in this thread would have already realized the target hasn't been named in Wikipedia, and would have known why.

[Giraffe Stapler]

I don't object to Wikipedia naming the group, I object to them "writing a summary of the situation" as a standalone article. Where this non-notable group appears to be getting UNDUE attention. If the NBC News link is representative.

I honestly don't know what you're trying to say here. You seem to be saying that a group which is not even named on Wikipedia is being given undue attention on Wikipedia, but that doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Can you use smaller words, perhaps? I'm not as smart as you.

[tarantino]

I honestly don't know what you're trying to say here. You seem to be saying that a group which is not even named on Wikipedia is being given undue attention on Wikipedia, but that doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Can you use smaller words, perhaps? I'm not as smart as you.

Are you Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer (T-H-L)?

[Kraken]

I don't object to Wikipedia naming the group, I object to them "writing a summary of the situation" as a standalone article. Where this non-notable group appears to be getting UNDUE attention. If the NBC News link is representative.

I honestly don't know what you're trying to say here. You seem to be saying that a group which is not even named on Wikipedia is being given undue attention on Wikipedia, but that doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Can you use smaller words, perhaps? I'm not as smart as you.

I see what you did there. Yes, the Anonymous Comrades Collective are not named on Wikipedia, as well as their target. Which only makes it even stupider that their pencil necked efforts, naming an individual who nobody can verify is StoneToss, has been rewarded by Wikipedia with an article about StoneToss.

That their efforts are summarized on that article, even though the coverage doesn't support that as the topic here, nor having the coverage to support Stonetoss as the topic either, is the issue. The apparent purpose is to reward and highlight the efforts of the ACC. Which is of course more accurately described as an activist group not a vigilant group. Just not a notable one.

The Vice coverage of the Ohio homeschooling Nazis suggested the ACC were part of Antifa, but that association no longer seems to be present in reliable sources. Perhaps because Antifa are about more than being pencil necks. Who can say. Nobody cares enough to research it. This being the risk of Wikipedia delving into non-notable stuff. The reader isn't served, only the mouth breathers.

The Ohio school stuff probably shows why the pencil necks are probably quite happy they don't have a Wikipedia article. Even the Vice coverage of their efforts, which is very pro-ACC (is Vice known for being vapidly left wing?) seems to suggest they do that very disreputable thing of cherry picking. Not really what bona fide researchers do. Bit embarrassing even for activist researchers who aspire to Wikipedia notability.

It leaves open the possibility, admittedly small, that even their Ohio expose is unfair and cruel. Who can say for sure. But reasonable inferences can be drawn from Vice reporting such as this....

The revelations about the Nazi homeschooling group led to a review by the Ohio Department of Education. However, the state found that the Lawrences were doing nothing illegal, and indicated there was nothing the department could do about it.

So either the state of Ohio, the "mother of Presidents", state capital "Columbus" (a mere half a day's ride west from the U.S. Capitol), is all about supporting and encouraging Nazi home schooling. Which is funny as fuck as far as explaining the recent attempted insurrection goes. So let's have more of that on Wikipedia please. Someone in the Democratic Party might learn something one day.

Or.....Wikipedia is indeed giving air time to the efforts of an activist group who named individuals as Nazi homeschoolers (hopefully illegal in Ohio) on the strength of evidence that is so weak it could never pass Wikipedia's bar for naming such people (WP:BLPCRIME).

So now the whole world knows who StoneToss is thanks to the hero pencil necks, or their booster Wikipedia editors (if they aren't sad enough to be writing their own copy), will we be all that surprised to learn in due course that StoneToss doesn't get arrested or even fired from his job? Either because it isn't even him, or it is but their proof is shite, or because extremely racist, antisemitic cartoons are just not illegal in Texas. Or wherever Twitter is incorporated. Or maybe even anywhere in the U.S.

Leading to the open question.....the purpose of these pencil necks is what? To tell the world that America's approach to Free Speech is wrong. Dead wrong. And they will never ever be able to do anything about it. Quite literally.

Or that Twitter is now a little bit racist and it's all down to that American billionaire Elon Musk believing that it would be a good thing if America's largest social network was more closely aligned with the current reality of American Free Speech?

Closer than certain activists and entire U.S states would like, but can't do anything about unless they really do have the stones to make this a matter of armed revolution. Which is their right. Their birthright. A right their enemies domestic hold dear too.

Leading to the question, is civil war in America inevitable? Perhaps even desirable? I doubt many people would actually die after all before victory was assured. And the potential upsides seem huge, both for the citizens of the US and the wider world. It could surely prevent the ongoing slaughter in Ukraine and Palestine and all the conflicts that have been forgotten about (Yemen, Syria, Sudan).

Because I think, I think, the cat was already out the bag on these amazing revelations.

I'm alright Jack btw. My interest is an observer, a thousand miles away. The idea that the UK would ever countenance Nazi homeschooling or extreme fascist cartoons in the public space is ludicrous. We don't have US Free Speech, but we would rather like the ability to protect our young people from the harms that U.S Free Speech brings.

Sadly Wikipedia isn't helping us in that regard. Hence perhaps why I take such an interest in who does what and why on that allegedly neutral encyclopedia. I don't want UK kids growing up believing any of this is normal for a mature democracy and free society.

[Giraffe Stapler]

The Vice coverage of the Ohio homeschooling Nazis suggested the ACC were part of Antifa, but that association no longer seems to be present in reliable sources. Perhaps because Antifa are about more than being pencil necks.

I called up the local Chapter of Antifa and they kindly checked their records for me. They said that all the pencil necks in the ACC were members in good standing except for one whose dues appeared to be outstanding, but they allowed that sometimes it takes a while for the records to be updated by Antifa Head Office.

[rnu]

The Vice coverage of the Ohio homeschooling Nazis suggested the ACC were part of Antifa, but that association no longer seems to be present in reliable sources. Perhaps because Antifa are about more than being pencil necks.

I called up the local Chapter of Antifa and they kindly checked their records for me. They said that all the pencil necks in the ACC were members in good standing except for one whose dues appeared to be outstanding, but they allowed that sometimes it takes a while for the records to be updated by Antifa Head Office.

Too many legacy admins (some since the sixties!) who have difficulty navigating the current technology stack.