Wikipediocracy

Blocked indefinitely, for testing out a template in my user space. As a gratuitous act of cruelty, the blocking admin deletes my user page, which was the only record of my contributions to Wikipedia.

Russavia twists the knife a little: follow the link he gives ‘here’.

@Peter Damian: I have placed the text you are needing here. russavia (talk) 17:56, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

That place is more messed up than even I believed.

Peter Damian wrote:Blocked indefinitely, for testing out a template in my user space.

The blocking admin cited the reason "insert a childish personal attack", not for "testing out a template". Might you elaborate on why there was this discrepancy between your description and his?

thekohser wrote:

Peter Damian wrote:Blocked indefinitely, for testing out a template in my user space.

The blocking admin cited the reason "insert a childish personal attack", not for "testing out a template". Might you elaborate on why there was this discrepancy between your description and his?

Indeed. I inserted some test 'vandalism' into the test article on my user page to see how the differencing link would work (the diff gives you all differences between the stable version and the current version). So I inserted some vandalism of the 'poo' and 'X is gay'. This was clearly ill-advised, as the admin probably thought it was real vandalism. Russavia imagined it was some sort of attack on him, by reason of the 'X'. I never intended anything of the sort, as I chose a popular American name. Quite forgetting it was Russavia's first name.

I did apologise for this, saying it was a genuine mistake, and explaining how it happened. The response was an indef block. And that's the odd thing. I wasn't blocked originally, the test page was merely removed. I was only blocked when I apologised with the explanation.

PD wrote: I inserted some test 'vandalism' into the test article on my user page to see how the differencing link would work (the diff gives you all differences between the stable version and the current version). So I inserted some vandalism of the 'poo' and 'X is gay'. This was clearly ill-advised, as the admin probably thought it was real vandalism. Russavia imagined it was some sort of attack on him, by reason of the 'X'. I never intended anything of the sort, as I chose a popular American name. Quite forgetting it was Russavia's first name.

Welllllllllll, maybe not such an "amazing" block...

BTW, Peter, my deleted User Page at Commons is cooler than yours!



https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Carrite

tim

I move that Tim becomes an admin on Commons. Then he can undelete his and Peter's pages, unblock Peter and generally create dramah. Maybe Greg could nominate him.

I have never understood how "admin on commons" is consistent with the crowdsourcing philosophy and the belief in the wisdom of crowds. I can see the need for many levels of workers on a large project like English Wikipedia. If one believes in the wisdom of crowds, why not just give everyone all of the tools on Commons? The worse thing that could happen is an edit war over the category sorting of photographs, and such disputes could be resolved by a vote.

Conversely, to the extent that professional supervision is necessary for the operation of commons (i.e., judgement about copyright, copyright templates, implementing child protection features), one would assume that a $50 million per year budget could cover the professional staff necessary to do that. Flickr seems to have an effective professional customer service staff, and there is no reason that the WMF could not staff Commons to provide a similar level of service.

Peter Damian wrote: I inserted some test 'vandalism' into the test article on my user page to see how the differencing link would work (the diff gives you all differences between the stable version and the current version). So I inserted some vandalism of the 'poo' and 'X is gay'. This was clearly ill-advised, ...

You should have used a picture from this Commons participant's extensive private softcore pr0n collection (NSFW). They would have loved you. You may even have qualified for Beta_M's special Commons barnstar (NSFW).

And if anyone asks to have the block reviewed, then you can reject with "off-site canvassing".

eagle wrote:I have never understood how "admin on commons" is consistent with the crowdsourcing philosophy and the belief in the wisdom of crowds. I can see the need for many levels of workers on a large project like English Wikipedia. If one believes in the wisdom of crowds, why not just give everyone all of the tools on Commons? The worse thing that could happen is an edit war over the category sorting of photographs, and such disputes could be resolved by a vote.

Conversely, to the extent that professional supervision is necessary for the operation of commons (i.e., judgement about copyright, copyright templates, implementing child protection features), one would assume that a $50 million per year budget could cover the professional staff necessary to do that. Flickr seems to have an effective professional customer service staff, and there is no reason that the WMF could not staff Commons to provide a similar level of service.

@eagle: Your proposals make good sense. However, they are totally out of line with the WMF philosophy, which does not always make sense.

Peter Damian is surprised to find that he isn't welcome on their project due to his general anti-wikipedian stance. Well at least you can be certain they don't like you, it would be worse if they let you back only to mock you and botch your edits at a later time when you aren't watching.

You apologized for making a mistake. If one of their objectives is having as many successful blocks and bans as they can, they're not going to read your apology, wheter it's sincere or not. You're on a black list, and aren't going to come off of it.

Another idea would be to stop giving them a stick which they then use to beat you down. You might be giving it willingly, or you might be giving it by clumsily tripping over it, mistakenly kicking it and propelling it towards them, but the result doesn't change, they're still going to beat you down with it.

Watch that stick and keep away from it! If you don't touch it, they can't do anything to you!

Textnyymi wrote:Peter Damian is surprised to find that he isn't welcome on their project due to his general anti-wikipedian stance. Well at least you can be certain they don't like you, it would be worse if they let you back only to mock you and botch your edits at a later time when you aren't watching.

You apologized for making a mistake. If one of their objectives is having as many successful blocks and bans as they can, they're not going to read your apology, wheter it's sincere or not. You're on a black list, and aren't going to come off of it.

Another idea would be to stop giving them a stick which they then use to beat you down. You might be giving it willingly, or you might be giving it by clumsily tripping over it, mistakenly kicking it and propelling it towards them, but the result doesn't change, they're still going to beat you down with it.

Watch that stick and keep away from it! If you don't touch it, they can't do anything to you!

I'm pretty sure Peter could get back in to English-WP if he tried. He decided not to do that.

Commons is another kettle of fish. Nasty, bitey fish — foul smelling and misshapen creatures that are all bones and no meat and that will poison your dog if he finds a dead one one the beach...


RfB

Jimmy Wales himself wrote: "I think that Commons policy is enforced inconsistently and also needs some revision. I think that some of the people who are admins at Commons are among the weakest admins that we have in all the projects, and that this is a core part of the problem." (May 8, 2013)

linkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =554187373[/link]

Randy from Boise wrote:

Jimmy Wales himself wrote: "I think that Commons policy is enforced inconsistently and also needs some revision. I think that some of the people who are admins at Commons are among the weakest admins that we have in all the projects, and that this is a core part of the problem." (May 8, 2013)

linkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =554187373[/link]

He did write that.

See here's the thing though: out of you, me, others here and there, and him - who's likely the only one in that list who could actually have taken some visible, tangible action to try and alter that?

And yes, he could have. Or at least tried.

I'm not saying he could have fixed it in an instant, but he could certainly have ushered in some change, or, failing that, by subsequent actions, left us in no doubt that he had really tried but is now unable to effect that sort of change.

So why bother even saying it without following it up?
Just a hankering for the old days when he just had to say stuff, and minions would run off and do it?

Time he put an action or two behind the fine words. It'd be ok if he then failed, honourably.

Needs balls.

Didn't he try to do something about Commons and have to back down to the extent of losing most of his powers? He wasn't going to be bitten again.

Randy from Boise wrote:Commons is another kettle of fish. Nasty, bitey fish — foul smelling and misshapen creatures that are all bones and no meat and that will poison your dog if he finds a dead one one the beach...

Are you saying that is why I'm allowed to have an account in good standing there?

thekohser wrote:

Randy from Boise wrote:Commons is another kettle of fish. Nasty, bitey fish — foul smelling and misshapen creatures that are all bones and no meat and that will poison your dog if he finds a dead one one the beach...

Are you saying that is why I'm allowed to have an account in good standing there?

A quick theory: allowing your presence there is a rigid middle finger to Jimmy Wales.

only half seriously,

RfB

Randy from Boise wrote:Commons is another kettle of fish. Nasty, bitey fish — foul smelling and misshapen creatures that are all bones and no meat and that will poison your dog if he finds a dead one one the beach...

Speaking of dead fish, did you know that Mr. Buck now has more than 12,800 images on Commons? He's literally using it as a Flickr. (His actual Flickr account has more than 20,000 photos, so he's still got some way to go.) And yes, he is now employed by the London Underground, making his hundreds of Tube photos on Commons possible conflicts of interest.

Speaking of "reform" on Commons is a joke and will remain so, as long as creatures such as Mr. Buck remain in power there. Amongst the very first things that should happen to change their direction is his desysopping. Since Wales cannot seem to do anything, and Moeller refuses to act, he will continue and things will fester.

(BTW, have you ever noticed that none of the search engines are indexing ANY Commons images? At all? One of the largest CC-licensed image depositories on earth that allows free reuse is not searchable from anyplace other than the Commons search box. That nofollow scheme is amazingly effective.)

EricBarbour wrote:
Speaking of "reform" on Commons is a joke and will remain so, as long as creatures such as Mr. Buck remain in power there. Amongst the very first things that should happen to change their direction is his desysopping. Since Wales cannot seem to do anything, and Moeller refuses to act, he will continue and things will fester.

(BTW, have you ever noticed that none of the search engines are indexing ANY Commons images? At all? One of the largest CC-licensed image depositories on earth that allows free reuse is not searchable from anyplace other than the Commons search box. That nofollow scheme is amazingly effective.)

Yes, I have noticed that. It's really quite bizarre, isn't it?

Images that are actually used in WP articles, whether they reside on En-WP or in Commons, are generally found in searches, however. At least I have seen my stuff floating around...


tim

EricBarbour wrote:BTW, have you ever noticed that none of the search engines are indexing ANY Commons images? At all? ...

I haven't noticed that, because it's not true.

For example, if I search Google images for "Avia M-137", half of the first six photos are found in Commons.

P.S. "nofollow" and "noindex" are different things.

Jim wrote: Needs balls.

Hey - some of the toughest people I know don't have balls. They do, however, have a spine.

#feministkilljoy

Hex wrote:

Jim wrote: Needs balls.

Hey - some of the toughest people I know don't have balls. They do, however, have a spine.

#feministkilljoy

Needs tattoos...

thekohser wrote:

EricBarbour wrote:BTW, have you ever noticed that none of the search engines are indexing ANY Commons images? At all? ...

I haven't noticed that, because it's not true.

For example, if I search Google images for "Avia M-137", half of the first six photos are found in Commons.

P.S. "nofollow" and "noindex" are different things.

You can also get results from Tineye.

Jim wrote:

Hex wrote: #feministkilljoy

Needs tattoos...

I didn't even know that was a hashtag people were actually using when I typed it!

NB: For "needs balls" substitute "needs gonads."

Problem solved.

RfB

Hex wrote:

Jim wrote:

Hex wrote: #feministkilljoy

Needs tattoos...

I didn't even know that was a hashtag people were actually using when I typed it!

I half guessed that you didn't.

But I applied [[WO:SOMEONEISBOUNDTOHAVEBEENTHATSILLY]] and checked it anyway - and hilarity ensued...

Randy from Boise wrote:NB: For "needs balls" substitute "needs gonads."

Problem solved.

RfB

Organist!

Randy from Boise wrote:NB: For "needs balls" substitute "needs gonads."

Problem solved.

RfB

... even if she didn't say it

Jim wrote:

Randy from Boise wrote:NB: For "needs balls" substitute "needs gonads."

Problem solved.

RfB

Organist!

OUTING!!!

Alison wrote:

Jim wrote:

Randy from Boise wrote:NB: For "needs balls" substitute "needs gonads."

Problem solved.

RfB

Organist!

OUTING!!!

Sometimes my smile joins my ears together on this site, and I bask in a happy glow.

This has been one of those times.

Ba-dum-tish all round, I think. (with crescendo)