Wikipediocracy: The Wikipedia article

Volunteer Marek · Unread post by **Volunteer Marek** » Sun May 19, 2013 5:05 am

Is it time?

Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Sun May 19, 2013 5:18 am

Volunteer Marek wrote:Is it time?

Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)

Anyone wanna lay bets how long this article will last?

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Sun May 19, 2013 5:22 am

EricBarbour wrote:
Volunteer Marek wrote:Is it time?

Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)
Anyone wanna lay bets how long this article will last?

About five minutes longer than it should have.

Get 3 big boy sources and spend a couple hours writing a real article if you want something to last...

RfB

Volunteer Marek · Unread post by **Volunteer Marek** » Sun May 19, 2013 5:33 am

EricBarbour wrote:
Volunteer Marek wrote:Is it time?

Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)
Anyone wanna lay bets how long this article will last?

Tsk tsk - when you make a move in chess the idea is to anticipate the moves of your opponent a few steps ahead. Gawd I hope Silver Seren will bring it to AfD!

The Joy · Unread post by **The Joy** » Sun May 19, 2013 5:46 am

Volunteer Marek wrote:
EricBarbour wrote:
Volunteer Marek wrote:Is it time?

Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)
Anyone wanna lay bets how long this article will last?
Tsk tsk - when you make a move in chess the idea is to anticipate the moves of your opponent a few steps ahead. Gawd I hope Silver Seren will bring it to AfD!

I'm waiting for Silver Seren, Prioryman, and Russavia to challenge it on the grounds that it is a site that "engages in outing/doxing Wikipedians" and "outed/doxed Robert Young Clark as Qworty." Double the stupidity, double the fun!

TungstenCarbide · Unread post by **TungstenCarbide** » Sun May 19, 2013 6:17 am

Volunteer Marek wrote:
EricBarbour wrote:
Volunteer Marek wrote:Is it time?

Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)
Anyone wanna lay bets how long this article will last?
Tsk tsk - when you make a move in chess the idea is to anticipate the moves of your opponent a few steps ahead. Gawd I hope Silver Seren will bring it to AfD!

hahaha; good at chess, bad at life

mac · Unread post by **mac** » Sun May 19, 2013 10:58 am

Volunteer Marek wrote:Is it time?

Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)

Perhaps not:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)

Vocal · Unread post by **Vocal** » Sun May 19, 2013 11:20 am

mac wrote:
Volunteer Marek wrote:Is it time?

Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)
Perhaps not:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)

lol, it's Shirt58 (T-C-L). I like him.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Sun May 19, 2013 1:13 pm

Looks like some folks wanted to have some fun on a Sunday morning, instead of going to church.

Wikipediocracy.

Vocal · Unread post by **Vocal** » Sun May 19, 2013 1:16 pm

I'll copy my post from the Qworty thread here.

Vocal wrote:
mac wrote:
Volunteer Marek wrote:Is it time?

Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)
Perhaps not:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)
lol, it's Shirt58 (T-C-L). I like him.

Unread post by **HRIP7** » Sun May 19, 2013 1:38 pm

Hmm ... if anyone's looking for sources, The Register once referred readers to our blog as well.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Sun May 19, 2013 2:26 pm

Volunteer Marek wrote:Is it time?

Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)

Sorry, I hadn't seen this post when I opened a new thread about "our" Wikipedia article. Since a Wikipedia article about Wikipediocracy is not really about the subject of "Qworty", I suggest that maybe a moderator do some post-moving over to the other thread?

Michaeldsuarez · Unread post by **Michaeldsuarez** » Sun May 19, 2013 5:01 pm

A Wikipediocracy article was recently created on enwiki. Save copies, because it might disappear. They're also trying to remove references to Qworty's real name. Including (now) indisputable facts within the article is apparently against policy.

Wer900 · Unread post by **Wer900** » Sun May 19, 2013 5:38 pm

I'm not concerned about its disappearance, because all votes on the AfD so far have been in favor of a keep.

Volunteer Marek · Unread post by **Volunteer Marek** » Sun May 19, 2013 5:44 pm

Vocal wrote:
mac wrote:
Volunteer Marek wrote:Is it time?

Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)
Perhaps not:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)
lol, it's Shirt58 (T-C-L). I like him.

Yeah, I was hoping it would be someone more obnoxious and the Shirt fellah seems ok.

(Yes this probably should be merged to the thread started by Michael)

mac · Unread post by **mac** » Sun May 19, 2013 6:36 pm

thekohser wrote:
Volunteer Marek wrote:Is it time?

Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)
Sorry, I hadn't seen this post when I opened a new thread about "our" Wikipedia article. Since a Wikipedia article about Wikipediocracy is not really about the subject of "Qworty", I suggest that maybe a moderator do some post-moving over to the other thread?

Actually, there are two now. Perhaps a thread merge is in order as well?

Unread post by **HRIP7** » Sun May 19, 2013 6:41 pm

mac wrote:
thekohser wrote:
Volunteer Marek wrote:Is it time?

Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)
Sorry, I hadn't seen this post when I opened a new thread about "our" Wikipedia article. Since a Wikipedia article about Wikipediocracy is not really about the subject of "Qworty", I suggest that maybe a moderator do some post-moving over to the other thread?
Actually, there are two now. Perhaps a thread merge is in order as well?

Mod. Note: Thread merge done

Captain Occam · Unread post by **Captain Occam** » Sun May 19, 2013 7:16 pm

Looks to me like this is heading for a snow keep.

The Devil's Advocate · Unread post by **The Devil's Advocate** » Sun May 19, 2013 7:40 pm

Lol, Andy has an interesting take on it:

Keep. for two reasons. Firstly because it appears to meet notability guidelines (and erring on the side of assuming it does is probably better PR than assuming it doesn't), and secondly because it will annoy the hell out of the conspiracy-mongers amongst Wikipediocracy contributors who are so obsessed with their own perceived self-importance that they have to blame the fact that their endless whining usually goes unnoticed on 'censorship', rather than boredom. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:50, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

mac · Unread post by **mac** » Sun May 19, 2013 7:43 pm

The Devil's Advocate wrote:Lol, Andy has an interesting take on it:

Keep. for two reasons. Firstly because it appears to meet notability guidelines (and erring on the side of assuming it does is probably better PR than assuming it doesn't), and secondly because it will annoy the hell out of the conspiracy-mongers amongst Wikipediocracy contributors who are so obsessed with their own perceived self-importance that they have to blame the fact that their endless whining usually goes unnoticed on 'censorship', rather than boredom. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:50, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Except by Salon.com (T-H-L)

DanMurphy · Unread post by **DanMurphy** » Sun May 19, 2013 7:51 pm

Vocal wrote:I'll copy my post from the Qworty thread here.
Vocal wrote:
mac wrote:
Volunteer Marek wrote:Is it time?

Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)
Perhaps not:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)
lol, it's Shirt58 (T-C-L). I like him.

Back when I cared about Wikipedia internal nonsense (and thought it was theoretically possible to write a "crowd-sourced" reference work of reasonable quality) I would probably have been a "delete" voter on this. Just not enough in secondary sources to write much of value.

As a researcher (using all sources available) it's of course possible to write a good article on this website. But by Wikipedia's internal rules (OMG! Synthesis! Oh, noes!) most of what you would do to write a decent article is not allowed. So we'll just have the little-old magpie hodgepodge. Which is fine/crappy/who cares?

It's the wiki way.

greybeard · Unread post by **greybeard** » Sun May 19, 2013 7:53 pm

[Mod note: more thread merging done]

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Sun May 19, 2013 10:02 pm

In the past, an AFD like this would have attracted a number of major irritants: Prioryman, Ottava, SV, etc.
This time, it's not. Why? I wonder if there's an argument about this on IRC.wikipedia-en.admins right now.

DanMurphy · Unread post by **DanMurphy** » Sun May 19, 2013 10:13 pm

EricBarbour wrote:In the past, an AFD like this would have attracted a number of major irritants: Prioryman, Ottava, SV, etc.
This time, it's not. Why? I wonder if there's an argument about this on IRC.wikipedia-en.admins right now.

Well, what good does it do this website to have the Wikipedia article become one of the top hits for the search term? If I was a smart insider who hated external criticism, I'd want it on Wikipedia since that would give me a chance to shape how it's seen by the general public (rather than the site speaking for itself).

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Sun May 19, 2013 10:25 pm

EricBarbour wrote:In the past, an AFD like this would have attracted a number of major irritants: Prioryman, Ottava, SV, etc.
This time, it's not. Why? I wonder if there's an argument about this on IRC.wikipedia-en.admins right now.

Those aren't irritants any more than pepper is an irritant in a dry rub.
They are what keep me coming back to wikipedia.

The club of the unintentionally hilarious.

Tarc · Unread post by **Tarc** » Sun May 19, 2013 10:28 pm

Almost a shame that the AfD didn't trend towards deletion. Would've been interesting to see how the Rescue Squad's reaction, as it is the type of article that they usually diligently and tirelessly squeeze blood from the reliable-source stone for.

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Sun May 19, 2013 10:50 pm

Now that Russavia is messing with it, I might mention this IRC capture, taken earlier today by persons unknown.
Save a copy of that, it might go away at any time. Always hilarious to see one of those little fucks accuse me of editing a WP article, when I'm not.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Sun May 19, 2013 10:55 pm

EricBarbour wrote:Now that Russavia is messing with it, I might mention this IRC capture, taken earlier today by persons unknown.
Save a copy of that, it might go away at any time. Always hilarious to see one of those little fucks accuse me of editing a WP article, when I'm not.

09:31 < Koi> I personally think that ArbCom needs to just get its fucking act together, take a look back at all of my and others' emails, and realize "oh. my. god. we've been infiltrated by cultist trolls" and ban them to oblivion. But no, that can't happen.

I completely agree with Scott Bibby.

I'm going to miss him.

Mason · Unread post by **Mason** » Sun May 19, 2013 11:02 pm

EricBarbour wrote:Now that Russavia is messing with it, I might mention this IRC capture, taken earlier today by persons unknown.
Save a copy of that, it might go away at any time. Always hilarious to see one of those little fucks accuse me of editing a WP article, when I'm not.

Shouldn't Russavia get a "connected contributor" box on the article's talk page like the one Qworty got?

He (1) is on the record with a very strong opinion of the site, and (2) is/was a member, albeit under a sockpuppet account. Surely that qualifies for a COI scarlet letter, n'est-ce pas?

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Sun May 19, 2013 11:11 pm

Mason wrote:
EricBarbour wrote:Now that Russavia is messing with it, I might mention this IRC capture, taken earlier today by persons unknown.
Save a copy of that, it might go away at any time. Always hilarious to see one of those little fucks accuse me of editing a WP article, when I'm not.
Shouldn't Russavia get a "connected contributor" box on the article's talk page like the one Qworty got?

He (1) is on the record with a very strong opinion of the site, and (2) is/was a member, albeit under a sockpuppet account. Surely that qualifies for a COI scarlet letter, n'est-ce pas?

Russavia is a currently banned member of this site, under 'russavia.'
Russavia is the subject of one of our articles.
Russavia is on record as attacking the site, and its members.
He has a COI a mile wide.

Volunteer Marek · Unread post by **Volunteer Marek** » Sun May 19, 2013 11:51 pm

EricBarbour wrote:Now that Russavia is messing with it, I might mention this IRC capture, taken earlier today by persons unknown.
Save a copy of that, it might go away at any time. Always hilarious to see one of those little fucks accuse me of editing a WP article, when I'm not.

"< Koi> Guess what troll created the article for Wikipediocracy (surprise, it was a WO troll), and now he's all pissy that a non-notable website he's a part of is up for deletion!"

Dangiitt, get straight. I was not pissy that it was up for deletion (I actually think he posted this before I even said anything), I was pissy that it was nominated for deletion by a sensible person.

(and I thought <koi> was russavia but he's posting there under <russavia> too?)

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Mon May 20, 2013 12:04 am

Volunteer Marek wrote:(and I thought <koi> was russavia but he's posting there under <russavia> too?)

"Koi" is actually Gwickwire, which is quite easy to guess from his obsessions.

Volunteer Marek · Unread post by **Volunteer Marek** » Mon May 20, 2013 12:05 am

EricBarbour wrote:
Volunteer Marek wrote:(and I thought <koi> was russavia but he's posting there under <russavia> too?)
"Koi" is actually Gwickwire, which is quite easy to guess from his obsessions.

Ah. Makes sense.

Mason · Unread post by **Mason** » Mon May 20, 2013 1:15 am

EricBarbour wrote:
Volunteer Marek wrote:(and I thought <koi> was russavia but he's posting there under <russavia> too?)
"Koi" is actually Gwickwire, which is quite easy to guess from his obsessions.

I look forward to seeing GW's inevitable sockpuppetry revealed.

Seeing the hateful "law and order" types like him and Qworty exposed for the hypocrites they are is little consolation after seeing them run roughshod over innocent people for so long, but a little consolation's better than none, I suppose.

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Mon May 20, 2013 8:37 am

Mason wrote: Shouldn't Russavia get a "connected contributor" box on the article's talk page like the one Qworty got?

Yes.

Mason · Unread post by **Mason** » Mon May 20, 2013 8:40 am

Hex wrote:
Mason wrote: Shouldn't Russavia get a "connected contributor" box on the article's talk page like the one Qworty got?
Yes.

I admire your cajones, sir.

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Mon May 20, 2013 9:00 am

As Zoloft notes above (very convenient for providing a citation), Russavia has the very definition of a conflict of interest.

And so that I don't, I won't be editing the article, or participating in its AFD. It ain't rocket science!

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Mon May 20, 2013 10:50 am

AWESOMESAUCE.

Snowolf (T-C-L) has oversighted the last few revisions of the talk page because they contained a webcitation link to this very thread.

Edit: Ah, it'll be because of Vigilant's post above, which mentions Russavia's name. I hadn't noticed that. Got to keep that cat in the bag, hey?

Hersch · Unread post by **Hersch** » Mon May 20, 2013 10:58 am

EricBarbour wrote:Now that Russavia is messing with it, I might mention this IRC capture, taken earlier today by persons unknown.
Save a copy of that, it might go away at any time. Always hilarious to see one of those little fucks accuse me of editing a WP article, when I'm not.

They act like 13 year olds are stupid and can't do anything in life?

Hersch · Unread post by **Hersch** » Mon May 20, 2013 11:00 am

Hex wrote:
Mason wrote: Shouldn't Russavia get a "connected contributor" box on the article's talk page like the one Qworty got?
Yes.

You cannot view this diff because one or both of the revisions has been suppressed.

Cla68 · Unread post by **Cla68** » Mon May 20, 2013 11:11 am

Looks like Russavia edit-warred to remove his name. Isn't that COI editing?

Anroth · Unread post by **Anroth** » Mon May 20, 2013 12:29 pm

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Mon May 20, 2013 12:29 pm

Volunteer Marek wrote:Gawd I hope Silver Seren will bring it to AfD!

Silver Seren grudgingly voted Keep!

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Mon May 20, 2013 1:04 pm

Just opened up my terminal connection to find this waiting for me:

IRC wrote: 11:30 -!- Irssi: Starting query in freenode with russavia
11:30 <russavia> you are a dog

OUTING!

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Mon May 20, 2013 3:28 pm

And it continues! The following message was rated PG for mixed metaphors and vague predictions.

IRC wrote: 14:43 -!- Irssi: Starting query in freenode with russavia
14:43 <russavia> you dogs will come undone before too long ya realise

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Mon May 20, 2013 4:06 pm

Scott Bibby is Russavia.

This strange desire to try to hold onto his shredded anonymity is just sad. Like a poorly aged 50 year old whore clutching the tattered remains of a grungy feather boa with her cigarette stained claws to her droopy breasts.

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Mon May 20, 2013 5:00 pm

Vigilant wrote:...

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Mon May 20, 2013 5:08 pm

Scott,

You make me laugh.

Sweet Revenge · Unread post by **Sweet Revenge** » Tue May 21, 2013 4:28 pm

Template:Did you know nominations/Wikipediocracy (T-H-L) courtesy of Reaper Eternal (T-C-L).

Michaeldsuarez · Unread post by **Michaeldsuarez** » Tue May 21, 2013 6:23 pm

Sweet Revenge wrote:Template:Did you know nominations/Wikipediocracy (T-H-L) courtesy of Reaper Eternal (T-C-L).

{{*mp}}... that '''[[Wikipediocracy]]''', a weblog and forum, is dedicated to criticizing Wikipedia?

Did you know <X> is <definition of X>?

These facts are supposed to be interesting. Surely, they can do better (although I'm glad Reaper Eternal is aware of the flaw with his or her own nomination, but why not have a good "hook" in mind before nominating it for a DYK?). Here are my DYK's:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Operation_Payback&diff=393561286&oldid=393147952

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Th3j35t3r&diff=406433075&oldid=405789839

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pakistanism&diff=454474391&oldid=452569540