Qworty

User avatar
greybeard
Habitué
Posts: 1364
kołdry
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:21 pm

Re: Qworty

Unread post by greybeard » Fri May 17, 2013 1:06 am

Sweet Revenge wrote:Qworty (T-C-L) seems to have outed his own self as Robert Clark Young (T-H-L) right here.
He's trying to get out ahead of something. The question is, what?

User avatar
Sweet Revenge
Gregarious
Posts: 538
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:42 pm

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Sweet Revenge » Fri May 17, 2013 1:18 am

greybeard wrote: He's trying to get out ahead of something. The question is, what?
Imagine the article Andrew Leonard would have written had he only known. Maybe that?

User avatar
Midsize Jake
Site Admin
Posts: 9872
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:10 pm
Wikipedia Review Member: Somey

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Midsize Jake » Fri May 17, 2013 2:09 am

Sweet Revenge wrote:
greybeard wrote: He's trying to get out ahead of something. The question is, what?
Imagine the article Andrew Leonard would have written had he only known. Maybe that?
Maybe... I guess we're about to find out! :blink:

Still, if the Gary Weiss case back in 2006 couldn't give Wikipedia a long-lasting black eye, I doubt this will give them so much as a grade-B zit. Hopefully I'm wrong...

And why do reporters put their Twitter feeds on their profile pages, anyway? Aren't they worried about people stealing their story ideas before they can finish writing them?

User avatar
Sweet Revenge
Gregarious
Posts: 538
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:42 pm

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Sweet Revenge » Fri May 17, 2013 2:23 am

Midsize Jake wrote: Maybe... I guess we're about to find out! :blink:
Via email I hear he's been working on it all week and the article is coming out tomorrow.

User avatar
tarantino
Habitué
Posts: 4695
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:19 pm

Re: Qworty

Unread post by tarantino » Fri May 17, 2013 2:32 am

Midsize Jake wrote: Still, if the Gary Weiss case back in 2006 couldn't give Wikipedia a long-lasting black eye, I doubt this will give them so much as a grade-B zit. Hopefully I'm wrong...
... or Ron Livingston v. John Doe AKA Mark Binmore.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31484
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri May 17, 2013 3:05 pm

I doubt that Qworty is Robert Clark Young.
If you go to
http://www.robertclarkyoung.com/
You can see he's been pretty busy dealing with his parents' long term care for the last year.
It's profoundly affected him and he's writing books about it, started a foundation, etc
All over his facebook as well.
https://www.facebook.com/RobertClarkYoung

There are no edits by qworty that even vaguely touch on that topic.
qworty's probably a ne'er do well wannabe writer, given his extreme vitriol over the last article.

Robert Clark Young is accomplished and almost certainly doesn't care if some other author got a leg up from their parents' influence in the publishing world.

qworty, lying to the end.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
DanMurphy
Habitué
Posts: 3136
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:58 pm
Wikipedia User: Dan Murphy
Wikipedia Review Member: DanMurphy

Re: Qworty

Unread post by DanMurphy » Fri May 17, 2013 4:13 pm

Robert Young has been defaming his enemies and puffing up himself via his Qworty account and (numerous sock puppets) for six years and New York Brad IS ON IT!
Your thoughts on your userpage and above present some interesting food for thought. However, some of your comments above are extremely troubling when considered in light of your edits and the "rants" you posted last month, which were extremely unfortunate and reflected negatively on the project. If you do continue or resume editing in the future, you are directed not to edit biographical articles concerning any living person (other than yourself and excluding reversion of obvious vandalism) and not to make disparaging comments about any living person on any page of Wikipedia. I hope you will understand that at this point, these restrictions ar in the best interests of all concerned. Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
How many editors are there like Young on Wikipedia? Legions of them. This one only got exposed because of the work of journalists and some of us here -- not through any of Wikipedia's so-called dispute resolution processes. That's the main point of the story.

IRWolfie-
Contributor
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:08 pm
Wikipedia User: IRWolfie-

Re: Qworty

Unread post by IRWolfie- » Fri May 17, 2013 4:25 pm

DanMurphy wrote:Robert Young has been defaming his enemies and puffing up himself via his Qworty account and (numerous sock puppets) for six years and New York Brad IS ON IT!
Your thoughts on your userpage and above present some interesting food for thought. However, some of your comments above are extremely troubling when considered in light of your edits and the "rants" you posted last month, which were extremely unfortunate and reflected negatively on the project. If you do continue or resume editing in the future, you are directed not to edit biographical articles concerning any living person (other than yourself and excluding reversion of obvious vandalism) and not to make disparaging comments about any living person on any page of Wikipedia. I hope you will understand that at this point, these restrictions ar in the best interests of all concerned. Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
How many editors are there like Young on Wikipedia? Legions of them. This one only got exposed because of the work of journalists and some of us here -- not through any of Wikipedia's so-called dispute resolution processes. That's the main point of the story.
Things go from speculation of who someone is to outright attacking the person based on that speculation very quickly.

User avatar
DanMurphy
Habitué
Posts: 3136
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:58 pm
Wikipedia User: Dan Murphy
Wikipedia Review Member: DanMurphy

Re: Qworty

Unread post by DanMurphy » Fri May 17, 2013 4:27 pm

IRWolfie- wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:Robert Young has been defaming his enemies and puffing up himself via his Qworty account and (numerous sock puppets) for six years and New York Brad IS ON IT!
Your thoughts on your userpage and above present some interesting food for thought. However, some of your comments above are extremely troubling when considered in light of your edits and the "rants" you posted last month, which were extremely unfortunate and reflected negatively on the project. If you do continue or resume editing in the future, you are directed not to edit biographical articles concerning any living person (other than yourself and excluding reversion of obvious vandalism) and not to make disparaging comments about any living person on any page of Wikipedia. I hope you will understand that at this point, these restrictions ar in the best interests of all concerned. Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
How many editors are there like Young on Wikipedia? Legions of them. This one only got exposed because of the work of journalists and some of us here -- not through any of Wikipedia's so-called dispute resolution processes. That's the main point of the story.
Things go from speculation of who someone is to outright attacking the person based on that speculation very quickly.
What "speculation?" Try to keep up.

IRWolfie-
Contributor
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:08 pm
Wikipedia User: IRWolfie-

Re: Qworty

Unread post by IRWolfie- » Fri May 17, 2013 4:33 pm

DanMurphy wrote:What "speculation?" Try to keep up.
"Anonymous editor says he is X" isn't the same as "Anonymous editor is X".

User avatar
Peter Damian
Habitué
Posts: 4201
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:14 pm
Wikipedia User: Peter Damian
Wikipedia Review Member: Peter Damian
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Peter Damian » Fri May 17, 2013 4:44 pm

Vigilant wrote:I doubt that Qworty is Robert Clark Young.
If you go to
http://www.robertclarkyoung.com/
You can see he's been pretty busy dealing with his parents' long term care for the last year.
It's profoundly affected him and he's writing books about it, started a foundation, etc
All over his facebook as well.
https://www.facebook.com/RobertClarkYoung

There are no edits by qworty that even vaguely touch on that topic.
qworty's probably a ne'er do well wannabe writer, given his extreme vitriol over the last article.

Robert Clark Young is accomplished and almost certainly doesn't care if some other author got a leg up from their parents' influence in the publishing world.

qworty, lying to the end.
Interesting how the same person can present such different pictures of themself. The Facebook page is interesting.

There was a similar dichotomy with Essjay. Legions of people turned up to sob and lay flowers on his user page, utterly convinced by the kind face he had presented to them. The odd thing though is that when you read that stuff it comes over as utter schlock. How can people be taken in by such stuff?
οὐκ ἀγαθὸν πολυκοιρανίη: εἷς κοίρανος ἔστω

User avatar
DanMurphy
Habitué
Posts: 3136
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:58 pm
Wikipedia User: Dan Murphy
Wikipedia Review Member: DanMurphy

Re: Qworty

Unread post by DanMurphy » Fri May 17, 2013 4:47 pm

IRWolfie- wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:What "speculation?" Try to keep up.
"Anonymous editor says he is X" isn't the same as "Anonymous editor is X".
Robert Young says he is Qworty. Qworty says he is Robert Young. These are facts. Prior to his admission, there was a mountain of evidence of this fact.

What's your name by the way?

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31484
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri May 17, 2013 4:48 pm

DanMurphy wrote:
IRWolfie- wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:What "speculation?" Try to keep up.
"Anonymous editor says he is X" isn't the same as "Anonymous editor is X".
Robert Young says he is Qworty. Qworty says he is Robert Young. These are facts. Prior to his admission, there was a mountain of evidence of this fact.

What's your name by the way?
I saw the Qworty page claiming to be Robert Young, where's the Robert Young page claiming to be Qworty?
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Peter Damian
Habitué
Posts: 4201
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:14 pm
Wikipedia User: Peter Damian
Wikipedia Review Member: Peter Damian
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Peter Damian » Fri May 17, 2013 4:59 pm

Vigilant wrote:I saw the Qworty page claiming to be Robert Young, where's the Robert Young page claiming to be Qworty?
Young was contacted by a journalist this week. Initially he denied having anything to do with Wikipedia. What is Wikipedia? Is it some kind of web site? That kind of thing. Immediately after the last contact, he rewrote the user:Qworty page. So, the Robert Young page is the Qworty page, and there he concedes he is Qworty.

And there is, as Dan says, an absolute mountain of evidence to prove this. It will be published soon I believe.
οὐκ ἀγαθὸν πολυκοιρανίη: εἷς κοίρανος ἔστω

IRWolfie-
Contributor
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:08 pm
Wikipedia User: IRWolfie-

Re: Qworty

Unread post by IRWolfie- » Fri May 17, 2013 5:02 pm

DanMurphy wrote:What's your name by the way?
Considering there are crackpots like: http://transpower.wordpress.com/2011/12 ... lear-atom/ I'm not planning to give out my real name. What would be the point? It only invites harassment

User avatar
Peter Damian
Habitué
Posts: 4201
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:14 pm
Wikipedia User: Peter Damian
Wikipedia Review Member: Peter Damian
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Peter Damian » Fri May 17, 2013 5:03 pm

IRWolfie- wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:What's your name by the way?
Considering there are crackpots like: http://transpower.wordpress.com/2011/12 ... lear-atom/ I'm not planning to give out my real name. What would be the point? It only invites harassment
People who are victims of Wikipedia's approach to biography have no such luxury.
οὐκ ἀγαθὸν πολυκοιρανίη: εἷς κοίρανος ἔστω

User avatar
DanMurphy
Habitué
Posts: 3136
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:58 pm
Wikipedia User: Dan Murphy
Wikipedia Review Member: DanMurphy

Re: Qworty

Unread post by DanMurphy » Fri May 17, 2013 5:05 pm

IRWolfie- wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:What's your name by the way?
Considering there are crackpots like: http://transpower.wordpress.com/2011/12 ... lear-atom/ I'm not planning to give out my real name. What would be the point? It only invites harassment
Credibility and accountability. I have little patience for cowards who criticize me (particularly when they don't have their facts straight).

User avatar
DanMurphy
Habitué
Posts: 3136
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:58 pm
Wikipedia User: Dan Murphy
Wikipedia Review Member: DanMurphy

Re: Qworty

Unread post by DanMurphy » Fri May 17, 2013 5:07 pm

Peter Damian wrote:
IRWolfie- wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:What's your name by the way?
Considering there are crackpots like: http://transpower.wordpress.com/2011/12 ... lear-atom/ I'm not planning to give out my real name. What would be the point? It only invites harassment
People who are victims of Wikipedia's approach to biography have no such luxury.
Good lord. Upgrading wolfie to sniveling coward after reading the link -- it's just some guy complaining that wolfie was involved in getting an article on a fringe physics theory deleted from Wikipedia. Oh the horror!
Last edited by DanMurphy on Fri May 17, 2013 5:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31484
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri May 17, 2013 5:09 pm

Peter Damian wrote:
Vigilant wrote:I saw the Qworty page claiming to be Robert Young, where's the Robert Young page claiming to be Qworty?
Young was contacted by a journalist this week. Initially he denied having anything to do with Wikipedia. What is Wikipedia? Is it some kind of web site? That kind of thing. Immediately after the last contact, he rewrote the user:Qworty page. So, the Robert Young page is the Qworty page, and there he concedes he is Qworty.

And there is, as Dan says, an absolute mountain of evidence to prove this. It will be published soon I believe.
Interesting. I'm surprised and that doesn't happen that often with wikipedia stuff.

I look forward to this article. Can you post a link here when it's released, please?

Strange days.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Midsize Jake
Site Admin
Posts: 9872
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:10 pm
Wikipedia Review Member: Somey

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Midsize Jake » Fri May 17, 2013 5:12 pm

Vigilant wrote:...where's the Robert Young page claiming to be Qworty?
If I were him, I'd be writing this up as a high-concept summary and shopping it around for a low-end book deal. His chances of getting one may not be all that good, but it's not like he has no experience with "creative non-fiction." Apparently he's the Creative Non-Fiction Editor for ConnotationPress.com. If he's really smart, which I think he might be, he'll have the book practically finished already in preparation for this very eventuality.

Anyway, if there's a chance he can exploit this situation to his own advantage - and I personally think he should - then you probably won't see a "Robert Young page claiming to be Qworty" until either the publication date or the point at which he gives up trying. I would also predict that he'll use the "Bob Young" sobriquet as much as possible in relation to this whole business from now until then, to try to minimize the Google footprint on his full name in case the story gets legs.

User avatar
eppur si muove
Habitué
Posts: 1978
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 1:28 pm

Re: Qworty

Unread post by eppur si muove » Fri May 17, 2013 5:18 pm

DanMurphy wrote:Robert Young has been defaming his enemies and puffing up himself via his Qworty account and (numerous sock puppets) for six years and New York Brad IS ON IT!
Your thoughts on your userpage and above present some interesting food for thought. However, some of your comments above are extremely troubling when considered in light of your edits and the "rants" you posted last month, which were extremely unfortunate and reflected negatively on the project. If you do continue or resume editing in the future, you are directed not to edit biographical articles concerning any living person (other than yourself and excluding reversion of obvious vandalism) and not to make disparaging comments about any living person on any page of Wikipedia. I hope you will understand that at this point, these restrictions ar in the best interests of all concerned. Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
How many editors are there like Young on Wikipedia? Legions of them. This one only got exposed because of the work of journalists and some of us here -- not through any of Wikipedia's so-called dispute resolution processes. That's the main point of the story.
There may be loads of Youngs and Haris but I bet that once the journalist and Wikipediocracy publish their stuff, NYB is going to find that his warning is a wasted effort as the lynch mob get down to important business of demonstrating that Young is no longer of the body.

User avatar
Midsize Jake
Site Admin
Posts: 9872
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:10 pm
Wikipedia Review Member: Somey

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Midsize Jake » Fri May 17, 2013 5:23 pm

DanMurphy wrote:Good lord. Upgrading wolfie to sniveling coward after reading the link -- it's just some guy complaining that wolfie was involved in getting an article on a fringe physics theory deleted from Wikipedia. Oh the horror!
I dunno - he may have a valid reason for concern here. The guy whose article he got deleted has been working on some software to computerize all Reciprocal System calculations into one easy-to-use database package, and once that hits the street, you have to figure that anyone who's not already part of the unstoppable Reciprocal Systems juggernaut will be crushed by its terrible, mighty jaws. I mean, it's a fully-integrated axiomatic system, right? You can't stop a fully-integrated axiomatic system, no matter how high your edit-count is.

IRWolfie-
Contributor
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:08 pm
Wikipedia User: IRWolfie-

Re: Qworty

Unread post by IRWolfie- » Fri May 17, 2013 5:29 pm

Midsize Jake wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:Good lord. Upgrading wolfie to sniveling coward after reading the link -- it's just some guy complaining that wolfie was involved in getting an article on a fringe physics theory deleted from Wikipedia. Oh the horror!
I dunno - he may have a valid reason for concern here. The guy whose article he got deleted has been working on some software to computerize all Reciprocal System calculations into one easy-to-use database package, and once that hits the street, you have to figure that anyone who's not already part of the unstoppable Reciprocal Systems juggernaut will be crushed by its terrible, mighty jaws. I mean, it's a fully-integrated axiomatic system, right? You can't stop a fully-integrated axiomatic system, no matter how high your edit-count is.
I see no reason to facilitate people who seem to be a little unhinged and think they "have every moral right to go after" me. If you want to call that cowardice, fire ahead, but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

User avatar
Mason
Habitué
Posts: 2273
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 3:27 am

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Mason » Fri May 17, 2013 5:33 pm

DanMurphy wrote:Robert Young has been defaming his enemies and puffing up himself via his Qworty account and (numerous sock puppets) for six years and New York Brad IS ON IT!
LOL, that's a bit "closing the barn door after the horse has escaped", innit?

Newyorkbrad is crazy if he thinks Young will return as Qworty. The next time Young wants to take another author down a peg or two, he'll just mint a brand new account like he's done dozens of times in the past.
Last edited by Mason on Fri May 17, 2013 5:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Mason
Habitué
Posts: 2273
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 3:27 am

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Mason » Fri May 17, 2013 5:45 pm

Midsize Jake wrote:
Vigilant wrote:...where's the Robert Young page claiming to be Qworty?
If I were him, I'd be writing this up as a high-concept summary and shopping it around for a low-end book deal. His chances of getting one may not be all that good, but it's not like he has no experience with "creative non-fiction."
I bet PublishAmerica (T-H-L) would be willing to make a deal with him. I'm sure Jeff Leinhard (T-C-L), Wnikodemus (T-C-L), Yossarian57 (T-C-L), David Jennings (T-C-L), Furs4Sale (T-C-L) and NathanW (T-C-L) would be interested in buying a copy, since their Wikipedia edits show an appreciation for Young's work.

User avatar
Midsize Jake
Site Admin
Posts: 9872
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:10 pm
Wikipedia Review Member: Somey

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Midsize Jake » Fri May 17, 2013 5:54 pm

Mason wrote:I bet PublishAmerica (T-H-L) would be willing to make a deal with him. I'm sure Jeff Leinhard (T-C-L), Wnikodemus (T-C-L), Yossarian57 (T-C-L), David Jennings (T-C-L), Furs4Sale (T-C-L) and NathanW (T-C-L) would be interested in buying a copy, since their Wikipedia edits show an appreciation for Young's work.

I SMELL PULITZER! :banana:

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31484
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri May 17, 2013 6:04 pm

Midsize Jake wrote:
Mason wrote:I bet PublishAmerica (T-H-L) would be willing to make a deal with him. I'm sure Jeff Leinhard (T-C-L), Wnikodemus (T-C-L), Yossarian57 (T-C-L), David Jennings (T-C-L), Furs4Sale (T-C-L) and NathanW (T-C-L) would be interested in buying a copy, since their Wikipedia edits show an appreciation for Young's work.

I SMELL PULITZER! :banana:
That's not what I smell.
Do we need a tubgirl smiley now?
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
lilburne
Habitué
Posts: 4446
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:18 pm
Wikipedia User: Nastytroll
Wikipedia Review Member: Lilburne

Re: Qworty

Unread post by lilburne » Fri May 17, 2013 6:11 pm

Mason wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:Robert Young has been defaming his enemies and puffing up himself via his Qworty account and (numerous sock puppets) for six years and New York Brad IS ON IT!
LOL, that's a bit "closing the barn door after the horse has escaped", innit?

Newyorkbrad is crazy if he things Young will return as Qworty. The next time Young wants to take another author down a peg or two, he'll just mint a brand new account like he's done dozens of times in the past.
Well lets paraphrase NTB shall we:
This is serious. So serious it is very serious! In fact I've not known anything this serious ever. It will seriously reflect badly on the project, seriously. You should seriously, think just how seriously stupid you've made us all look.
They have been inserting little memes in everybody's mind
So Google's shills can shriek there whenever they're inclined


User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31484
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri May 17, 2013 6:33 pm

WOW.

Excellent article.
Kudos to Andrew Leonard and the group of our very own WO guys.

It's interesting to me, personally, that Andrew went down the same rathole I just did.
Makes me feel ever so slightly less stupid.

Can someone who isn't banned go post a link to AN/I, NewYorkBrad's page, Jimbo's page and Qworty's page?

Stunningly funny.
Bad, bad, bad for wikipedia.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

IRWolfie-
Contributor
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:08 pm
Wikipedia User: IRWolfie-

Re: Qworty

Unread post by IRWolfie- » Fri May 17, 2013 6:37 pm

Ok, now I see why they are the same person. This looks pretty damning.

User avatar
DanMurphy
Habitué
Posts: 3136
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:58 pm
Wikipedia User: Dan Murphy
Wikipedia Review Member: DanMurphy

Re: Qworty

Unread post by DanMurphy » Fri May 17, 2013 6:40 pm

Vigilant wrote:WOW.

Excellent article.
Kudos to Andrew Leonard and the group of our very own WO guys.

It's interesting to me, personally, that Andrew went down the same rathole I just did.
Makes me feel ever so slightly less stupid.

Can someone who isn't banned go post a link to AN/I, NewYorkBrad's page, Jimbo's page and Qworty's page?

Stunningly funny.
Bad, bad, bad for wikipedia.
My impression is that Young thinks this is all wonderful and maybe he'll get a book contract out of it. The fact that he provided that picture at the top of the Salon article says volumes about him.

Narcissists make really, really good liars, which has helped him take people in.

User avatar
Midsize Jake
Site Admin
Posts: 9872
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:10 pm
Wikipedia Review Member: Somey

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Midsize Jake » Fri May 17, 2013 6:45 pm

For me, the big takeaway from this whole business would be this important safety tip for current and future WP revenge-editors - don't attack people from the New York Times who have just written uncomplimentary op-eds about Wikipedia. You should at least wait a few weeks until things cool down a little bit.

I wonder how long he could have gone on without being noticed, if he hadn't done that? I would tend to think indefinitely, considering the current (and longstanding) state of things over there.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31484
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri May 17, 2013 6:46 pm

DanMurphy wrote:
Vigilant wrote:WOW.

Excellent article.
Kudos to Andrew Leonard and the group of our very own WO guys.

It's interesting to me, personally, that Andrew went down the same rathole I just did.
Makes me feel ever so slightly less stupid.

Can someone who isn't banned go post a link to AN/I, NewYorkBrad's page, Jimbo's page and Qworty's page?

Stunningly funny.
Bad, bad, bad for wikipedia.
My impression is that Young thinks this is all wonderful and maybe he'll get a book contract out of it.
If he thinks that, he's more than a bit delusional.
The fact that he provided that picture at the top of the Salon article says volumes about him.
Is that a non photo-shopped picture?
I've seen the foreground before
Image
Image
I get the feeling it's a composite picture of this one and a laptop screen.
Narcissists make really, really good liars, which has helped him take people in.
There are a much greater representation of narcissists on wikipedia than are in the general population.
That's an incontrovertible fact.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31484
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri May 17, 2013 6:47 pm

Midsize Jake wrote:For me, the big takeaway from this whole business would be this important safety tip for current and future WP revenge-editors - don't attack people from the New York Times who have just written uncomplimentary op-eds about Wikipedia. You should at least wait a few weeks until things cool down a little bit.

I wonder how long he could have gone on without being noticed, if he hadn't done that? I would tend to think indefinitely, considering the current (and longstanding) state of things over there.
Or he could have spun off another SPA to do the dirty work.
He was lazy.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
DanMurphy
Habitué
Posts: 3136
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:58 pm
Wikipedia User: Dan Murphy
Wikipedia Review Member: DanMurphy

Re: Qworty

Unread post by DanMurphy » Fri May 17, 2013 6:49 pm

Vigilant wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:
Vigilant wrote:WOW.

Excellent article.
Kudos to Andrew Leonard and the group of our very own WO guys.

It's interesting to me, personally, that Andrew went down the same rathole I just did.
Makes me feel ever so slightly less stupid.

Can someone who isn't banned go post a link to AN/I, NewYorkBrad's page, Jimbo's page and Qworty's page?

Stunningly funny.
Bad, bad, bad for wikipedia.
My impression is that Young thinks this is all wonderful and maybe he'll get a book contract out of it.
If he thinks that, he's more than a bit delusional.
The fact that he provided that picture at the top of the Salon article says volumes about him.
Is that a non photo-shopped picture?
I've seen the foreground before
Image
Image
I get the feeling it's a composite picture of this one and a laptop screen.
Narcissists make really, really good liars, which has helped him take people in.
There are a much greater representation of narcissists on wikipedia than are in the general population.
That's an incontrovertible fact.
Ah, you're probably right that it's a composite picture.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31484
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri May 17, 2013 6:59 pm

I'm thinking this might apply...

Image
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Midsize Jake
Site Admin
Posts: 9872
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:10 pm
Wikipedia Review Member: Somey

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Midsize Jake » Fri May 17, 2013 7:04 pm

Vigilant wrote:Or he could have spun off another SPA to do the dirty work.
He was lazy.
I'm not so sure about that, actually. Like I've been saying, this fellow seems to be a bit more clever, not to mention dedicated, to his personal mission than most of the people we've seen do this sort of thing in the past. I suspect he knew the edits to the Filipacchi-related articles would be challenged, and a SPA would have been reverted immediately and probably blocked - he had to risk sacrificing what I'd assume is the main account, in the hopes that the edit count and the general mean-guy reputation would help keep the edits from getting reverted right away.

And looking into this a bit more closely, I really don't think he had much to lose by pushing the behavioral envelope. Clearly, years of "burnishing" his own WP article hadn't helped jump-start his career as an author, so I suspect it finally dawned on him that the mere existence of a positive WP article about you doesn't cause the world to beat a path to your door. Wikipedia may be the #6 site on the internet, but it also has 30 million pages. So it's a lot of traffic, sure, but that's also a lot of pages to spread that traffic around (and a large portion of that goes to the Main Page anyway).

If you accept that there's "no such thing as bad publicity," then this incident will probably do more for him of a semi-tangible nature than his past eight years of WP activity combined - and that's with full knowledge that some of the things he's been doing are, shall we say, rather lacking in self-restraint.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31484
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri May 17, 2013 7:11 pm

Midsize Jake wrote:
Vigilant wrote:Or he could have spun off another SPA to do the dirty work.
He was lazy.
I'm not so sure about that, actually. Like I've been saying, this fellow seems to be a bit more clever, not to mention dedicated, to his personal mission than most of the people we've seen do this sort of thing in the past. I suspect he knew the edits to the Filipacchi-related articles would be challenged, and a SPA would have been reverted immediately and probably blocked - he had to risk sacrificing what I'd assume is the main account, in the hopes that the edit count and the general mean-guy reputation would help keep the edits from getting reverted right away.

And looking into this a bit more closely, I really don't think he had much to lose by pushing the behavioral envelope. Clearly, years of "burnishing" his own WP article hadn't helped jump-start his career as an author, so I suspect it finally dawned on him that the mere existence of a positive WP article about you doesn't cause the world to beat a path to your door. Wikipedia may be the #6 site on the internet, but it also has 30 million pages. So it's a lot of traffic, sure, but that's also a lot of pages to spread that traffic around (and a large portion of that goes to the Main Page anyway).

If you accept that there's "no such thing as bad publicity," then this incident will probably do more for him of a semi-tangible nature than his past eight years of WP activity combined - and that's with full knowledge that some of the things he's been doing are, shall we say, rather lacking in self-restraint.
Your analysis is better than mine. I concede.
That account's only edit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Co ... o_Prescott

This is some funny, funny shit.

Edit:
Makes you wonder how many of his reviews on Amazon are real.
Someone should drop them a line.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Tippi Hadron
Queen
Posts: 933
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:15 am
Wikipedia User: DracoEssentialis
Actual Name: Monika Nathalie Collida Kolbe

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Tippi Hadron » Fri May 17, 2013 7:36 pm

Our blog post on Bob Young aka Robert Clark Young aka Qworty is here.

And the story is all over twitter.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31484
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri May 17, 2013 7:39 pm

Ho shit!
It's better than I thought.

I'm doing some digging at Amazon on RCY's reviews.

The Death of the Death of the Novel (One Writer's Big Innings: Literary Series)
http://www.amazon.com/Death-Novel-Write ... 0070NB2XE/

Three reviewers, all five star reviews...Seems a bit ... fishy.
Digging through the reviewers, you can see that they've never left anything BUT a five star review.
There's a word for this: Shill.

Thank You for Keeping Me Sober, Volume I: The Story of Dr. Bill Kent
http://www.amazon.com/Thank-You-Keeping ... 0072Y2W6W/

Seven reviewers, all five stars... Including one of them from the first book...
Hmmm....

It's pretty much like that through all of the reviews sections. A few honest reviews, but tons and tons of pablum from people who only give out five stars and have, apparently, read every book Bob's ever written.

Needs more work.
Tell Andrew.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31484
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri May 17, 2013 7:45 pm

The salon article has made the reddit wikipedia page.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
SB_Johnny
Habitué
Posts: 4640
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:26 am
Wikipedia User: SB_Johnny
Wikipedia Review Member: SB_Johnny

Re: Qworty

Unread post by SB_Johnny » Fri May 17, 2013 7:53 pm

Heh. :popcorn:
This is not a signature.

User avatar
Midsize Jake
Site Admin
Posts: 9872
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:10 pm
Wikipedia Review Member: Somey

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Midsize Jake » Fri May 17, 2013 7:54 pm

Vigilant wrote:It's pretty much like that through all of the reviews sections. A few honest reviews, but tons and tons of pablum from people who only give out five stars and have, apparently, read every book Bob's ever written.

Needs more work.
Tell Andrew.
OK, but he may already know about that... at the risk of being seen as Devil's Advocate here, (alleged) self-promotion via Amazon.com reviews pages is very common. I wouldn't even say the level of it we're seeing there is all that unusual, really. It's easier, too - you don't have to be quite as subtle, and there's relatively little "reputational buildup" required once you set up an account, in order to get a review included. Obviously Amazon.com is trying to sell product, so they have little interest in preventing the posting of bad reviews.

Which reminds me of another potential positive result for Mr. Young from this incident - more people may be be looking for, buying, and reading his stuff over the next few weeks than have done so in years, maybe ever. (Probably not enough to make him any money, but eh, what're ya gonna do.)
SB_Johnny wrote:Heh. :popcorn:
Well, of course from their perspective, Wikipedia must be seen as the victim in this affair - people will do searches on "Robert Clark Young" and instead of seeing a huge article laced with self-promotional kudos, they'll see that, and say "what's all the fuss about?" Standard WP procedure in a case like this - quick cleanup on aisle 3, sweep it under the rug, minimize and/or avoid criticism.

jd turk
Contributor
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 2:05 am
Wikipedia Review Member: jd turk

Re: Qworty

Unread post by jd turk » Fri May 17, 2013 8:39 pm

Really good work on all fronts. Nicely done, and in a way that the majority of people who look at WP without editing it should be able to understand.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31484
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri May 17, 2013 8:52 pm

Some additional data on Robert Clark Young

Twitter
https://twitter.com/wryandsardonic
Twitter image
Image

From his feed:
The world desperately needs a Narcissists Anonymous group. The hitch is that none of them wants to be anonymous.
Apropos.

Narcissism seems to be the defining element of RCY's life
http://www.robertclarkyoung.com/Column.html
http://www.robertclarkyoung.com/testimonials.html
http://www.robertclarkyoung.com/services.html

1) Write a bunch of crappy articles.
2) Get someone to tell you how wonderful you are and post that review (Amazon is rife).
3) Try to sell a book on the strength of the previous.

As someone who's gone through dealing with an older family member dying in that way, the last thing that would come to my mind is trying to cash in on that process. It's vile enough already, you don't have to try to make it worse.

Yahoo profile:
http://contributor.yahoo.com/user/11005 ... young.html
Words fail me at this...
Robert Clark Young
I have been a caregiver for my parents since 2008, when they both suffered strokes. When I started, I knew nothing about eldercare, but I now believe that anyone with a compassionate heart can learn to be a caregiver. I have decided to use my experience to help others, by writing a book called THE SURVIVOR: HOW TO DEAL WITH YOUR AGING PARENTS, WHILE ENRICHING YOUR OWN LIFE. The book is seeking a publisher. I am hoping that it will help all of those people who are suddenly placed in the position of caring for an infirm parent. Some of these columns are excerpted from the book, and many of them originally appeared in the Davis Enterprise.
http://voices.yahoo.com/the-myth-dement ... html?cat=5
The filmmaker shuts the camera off. "I don't think your father even knows who you are. And I think you're just pretending to understand what your mother is talking about."

The filmmaker is in our house to make a documentary about my caring for my parents. I've agreed to the project because I believe it will advance the cause of eldercare, helping and inspiring seniors and the family members who care for them.
Really? Is that why you're USING YOUR FUCKING PARENTS to try to make some coin?
You fucking loathsome piece of shit!

His domain is hosted out of the site that he got the web software from.
http://whatismyipaddress.com/ip/209.157.71.208
It's registered through a privacy cloak registrar in Canada.
Registrant:
Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0132014336
96 Mowat Ave
Toronto, ON M6K 3M1
CA

Domain name: ROBERTCLARKYOUNG.COM

Administrative Contact:
Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0132014336, robertclarkyoung.com@contactprivacy.com
96 Mowat Ave
Toronto, ON M6K 3M1
CA
+1.4165385457
Technical Contact:
Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0132014336, robertclarkyoung.com@contactprivacy.com
96 Mowat Ave
Toronto, ON M6K 3M1
CA
+1.4165385457
Makes me think he has more to hide.

IMDB fame:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2084941/
Storyline

Robert Clark Young spends the first 47 years of his life looking for fame, fortune and love, only to end up a troubled young alcoholic, obsessive writer, and mercenary has-been. When both his parents have strokes and nobody else in the family will care for them, Bob returns home to San Diego and embarks on a transformative journey of self discovery which takes him as far outside himself as he's ever been in his life. Filmmaker Terisa Greenan follows Bob's odyssey of self discovery and tells his story with unflinching truth and surprising humor as he confronts the demons of his past by providing daily, life-giving care to his disabled mother and father. Written by Terisa Greenan, Director
Checking the obvious.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... on=history
Yeppers, there's Qworty! It really is a minor edit, but there are a bunch of IPs hacking on there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Co ... 18.233.184
Little bit of hack-n-slash...
Where does that resolve to?
http://whatismyipaddress.com/ip/24.18.233.184
Geolocation Information
Country: United States us flag
State/Region: Washington
City: Seattle
Latitude: 47.6062 (47° 36′ 22.32″ N)
Longitude: -122.3321 (122° 19′ 55.56″ W)
Area Code: 206
From her contact information on her website:
http://www.terisagreenan.com/contact.html
Please ONLY contact Terisa's agent with PAID acting work. For personal appearances and interviews, please contact Terisa directly.

Terisa Greenan is represented by:

Melissa Klein

TCM Models
2200 - 6th Ave. #530
Seattle, WA 98121

melissak@tcmmodels.com

Phone: (206)728-4826
FAX: (206)728-1814

You can e-mail Terisa directly at terisagreenan@comcast.net

Follow Terisa on Twitter!
https://twitter.com/terisagreenan

It's also her only film.
http://www.imdb.com/search/title?plot_a ... tt_stry_pl

Seems like apples and not falling far from the tree here.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31484
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri May 17, 2013 9:07 pm

Nice jacket, Hugh.

Image

Another piece of the puzzle falls into place.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... =480%2C360
Robert Clark Young

My dad with three of his nieces, who came all the way from Mexico City and Veracruz to help celebrate his 85th birthday. Eldercare is so much easier when you have family who actually care.
There have been a bunch of IP edits to Qworty driven articles that geolocate to the Federal District, Mexico City.
Now, I know why.

Can it get any stranger?

SUUUREEE!

I thought the name "Terisa Greenan" seemed familiar.
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/51386562.html
Terisa recently started dating a third man, and her two current partners are OK with that.
Well, I wonder who that might be?

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Someday- ... 3268034413

http://www.webboar.com/whois-email/teri ... omcast.net
http://www.webboar.com/www/3dogpictures.com
Same as the publisher of RCY's "movie".

Some of their other "movies". Nice.
http://3dogpictures.com/trix.html
http://3dogpictures.com/family.html
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12080
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Fri May 17, 2013 9:10 pm

IRWolfie- wrote:
Ok, now I see why they are the same person. This looks pretty damning.
You obviously missed this from earlier in this thread:
Sweet Revenge wrote:Qworty (T-C-L) seems to have outed his own self as Robert Clark Young (T-H-L) right here.
This is a really ugly episode whether or not it gets play in the mainstream media. It is yet another example of why Wikipedia's Cult of Anonymity is inherently unsavory and intellectually indefensible, and the way that its continuation undermines the cause of free, accurate, verifiable encyclopedic information...

Hopefully there will be a few Wikipedians that will go through article histories to investigate and clean up what now seems to be a pattern of bad COI editing by Mr. Young.

RfB

User avatar
Sweet Revenge
Gregarious
Posts: 538
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:42 pm

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Sweet Revenge » Fri May 17, 2013 9:10 pm

For now at least Google ranks WO blog above Salon for search on qworty+robert+clark+young. Screenshot if it doesn't last:
(edit to add less blurry version)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Peter Damian
Habitué
Posts: 4201
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:14 pm
Wikipedia User: Peter Damian
Wikipedia Review Member: Peter Damian
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Qworty

Unread post by Peter Damian » Fri May 17, 2013 9:26 pm

Randy from Boise wrote:Hopefully there will be a few Wikipedians that will go through article histories to investigate and clean up what now seems to be a pattern of bad COI editing by Mr. Young.

RfB
Yup but I think we should go for the ones that are left. The easiest way now seems to be to develop relationships with journalists in the mainstream media who can write about it. This will create the impetus for Wikipedians "to go through article histories to investigate and clean up what now seems to be a pattern of bad COI editing".

Tim, we worked very hard on this story. Why didn't you pick up on this before?
οὐκ ἀγαθὸν πολυκοιρανίη: εἷς κοίρανος ἔστω

Post Reply