My Wikipedia Hell

blackyblue
Contributor
Posts: 6
kołdry
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 4:52 am
Actual Name: Steven Gall

My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by blackyblue » Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:03 am

I will begin with describing myself.
I am an ex conspiracy theorist. I first got into conspiracy around 2009. However by 2012 i was verging on conspiracy Skepticism and by 2016 i am relatively active in trying to bring to light some of the dangers of conspiracy. I have come to the realisation that certain guru's are not just harmless crackpots like many regard them. But are actually quite dangerous madmen. Especially when it come to Anti-vaccination, Aids denialism, alternative cures ect. They are dangerous, and they kill people and they make money out of selling alternative cures that cost more than conventional cures, and on top of that, they dont work.

Anyway, i am not here to bash you with my enlightenment and my over arrogance, i am here to tell you about my wikipedia hell.

Wikipedia has for years been a great tool for me to get information to help me tackle conspiracy believers in debate. I am unbeaten over at debate.org. Not because i am intelligent, but because i get all my information from wikipedia. I have you editors to thank for my 100% unbeaten record in debates for points.

Now i perhaps stupidly had an inclination to make an article regarding HIV denialism, and as an admirer of Wikipedia i thought what better place to try get the information out there.

So for the first time ever i decided to create a wikipedia account.
It was perhaps a stupid mistake, especially being my first post. It was always going to be hard to remain neutral given that i am a hardcore opponent of aids denialism, and no matter how hard i try to be neutral, it is always going to shine through that i am an opponent of aids denialism.

Anyway, i first tried the username i am most commonly known as on other forums, and it was already taken.
So i tried "Illuminati". Already taken. Tried "Itanimulli", already taken. I then tried my name backwards, and that was already taken.
I tried my name backwards adding a 1. Already taken.
Added a 2. Already taken.
Finally, i added a 3, and hallelujah, i had just created my first account.

I then logged out of the account to make sure i could log back in again, and when i did i got a message saying password not recognised. (Maybe i made a typo). But instead of trying again, i just created another account and called it "Nevets4".

So, i went and i began trying to work out how you create an article, and i got to work.
However i noticed at the top of the page was my username, "Nevets4" and i did not want my username at the top of my article.

For example, when i am using wikipedia, and i am on a page called "Aids denialism" ususally at the top of the page is "Aids denialism".

So, i began trying to work out how to replace my username with the name i want to head my article with, and i could find noway of doing this. (Please remember this is my first 5-10mins of ever being having an account with Wikipedia).

So, not realising then that just because it is my username that as at the top of my article while creating it, does not mean that is what the article will be called when created, i logged back out, and created a username that was identical to what i wanted to call my article.

So i spent several hours on my article. Not doing a great job, as i was just eager to get my first ever article onto wikipedia, or at least find out how the place works. I admit the article was not in the least bit worthy of inclusion, and not surprisingly it got rejected.

What i was surprised about, was one of the reasons it got rejected.

It got rejected because they had noticed that my username was the same as my article (Not a hard thing to notice) and this suggested to them that i was using the account for promotional purposes or was in some way affiliated with the group i was writing about.

I was surprised at this, because i am a hard-core opponent of Aids denialism and the group i was discussing in the article are Aids denialists and my article was not favourable to them in the slightest, so i was suprised how anyone reading the article could possibally get the impression i am affiliated with the group.

Anyway, it was not long before i received a message telling me i was blocked from editing. The reasons given for my block where the same as above. They suspect that i am affiliated with the Aids denialist group. (Although i got the impression that whoever looked at the article had not taken much time to read it, if they got the impression i was speaking favouraby about this Aids denialist group).

So i then went through the painstaking process of trying to get unblocked.

The person that blocked me put on my template some advice on how i can appeal.
However whenever i clicked on the link, it would just bring to a page with stacks of advice and information, and whenever i came to something a link that actually worked, it would not let me make my appeal as i would just get a message saying "You are blocked from editing".

WOW, i thought. they give me a link to make an appeal but i cant actually make the appeal because making the appeal would mean writing, and i am blocked from writing.

So, pulling my hair out i kept trying, and trying, and trying. (By this time i have forgot all about Nevets3 and Nevets4...And i think i just assumed for some reason those accounts would have got merged in with my new-one anyway)

Finally, probably by fluke, i doubt i could even find it again, i found something and was able to make contact with someoene at last, Hallelujah.

So i requested i become unblocked and requested a new username.

Almost instantly, i received an email from wikipedia telling me "We cant authorise this account just now because you are blocked" and they sent me a link, and it was the very same link that the admin who had blocked me, sent me. Aghhhhhhhhhhhhhhr.

Getting a little exasperated now, i just emailed back, saying "Look ect ect ect...Cant you just give me a link to an appeals department or simply just close my old account and give me a new one without all this sifting through pages and pages and pages and pages of information with little final resolution.

I then went to the new username i had requested "Nevets30" and i tried to log in with it, and i was quite surprised when it gave me access.

I then went to my page, just to be utterly dejected when i received a message on my page telling me "This account is blocked".

I assumed that it was a URL block.

I then went to Sandbox a little time later, and i suddenly found out i was able to edit.
I went back to my user page and the message telling me i was blocked had dissapeared. So what do you think i assumed? i assumed that my "Email reply" had been accepted and that they had afterall just decided to scrap my old account and reward me with my requested ne username.

So, i got about editing.
I did not even bother going back to my old article, i had dropped it from my agenda as i knew i could not write it in a neutral way.
So i just got about editing.

I made 9 or 10 edits. All of which remained on wikipedia and never got removed, so i can only assume that they were accepted as accurate with a verifiable source.

I received no complaints about my editing.

Then, i did an edit on the CIA page. It was not 100% favourable to the CIA, and it was regarding one of their controversies, and straight away within seconds this was removed, and i had the person that removed it on my page, not telling me that my information was wrong, but telling me that he had removed my edit because i was not allowed to edit as i have a blocked sock puppet account.

Eh? i thought. I then received several other messages, and could see he was making several complaints to admins, calling me a "gamer" "sock puppet" ect.

I went to sleep, not worried, and in the morning when i woke up, i logged in and was so dissapointed to see that one of the admins had taken his claim seriously and decided i was infact a sock puppet with a blocked username.

So i went about trying to explain myself, and finally managed to find a way of appealing my block (which i thought had already been resolved) and i was given a ticket number and i stated my case...forgetting about Nevets3 & 4)

After several hours i received a reply telling me i was unblocked to request a change of username. (dont know why she could not just have closed the account and let me have Nevets20...but hey ho)

So i went about trying to find out how you request a new username. Sifting through endless pages of informations.
Then after about 1 hour, a message suddenly popped up telling me i am blocked again because she had just found out about Nevets 3 & 4 and told me i am "A SOCK MASTER".

Below is a brief conversation i found about me between admins

"The editor has 3 other accounts which I blocked recently as socks. If you look at this version of the talk page for Nevets20[5] you'll see ". I then put in a change name "request" [ACC #164445]". When I blocked I knew nothing about this, and he/she still hasn't mentioned the other 2 accounts User:Nevets3 and User:Nevets4. name withheld talk 16:32, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

@Name withheld: Oh, good grief. All I could see was a username hardblock. I didn't know anything about this either. Do you want to reblock or should I? Katietalk 16:37, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Never mind - I reblocked as the sock master since you tagged the others that way. name withheld 17:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, but I'm still confused. If he did ask for a request and got it, there's no indication and I don't know where to look, but if that was all I'd unblock. It's the other 2 accounts. Anyway, he's deleted his appeals, etc. Name withheld talk 17:43, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
I put it in the unblock log - UTRS #15326. He claimed he was making an article about a film of the same name and that he was inexperienced, so he simply named himself after the film. I AGF'd and all that but I didn't know he was a sockmaster. Name withheld 17:52, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. Name withheld talk 18:58, 28 February 2016 (UTC)"


My take on the above.

It is great to see them doing their job so well.
I am a "SOCK MASTER".

Please bear in mind, it says in their terms and conditions that having multiple accounts is not against wikipedia policy and is only against wikipedia policy if they are being used for illegitimate purposes.

Also bear in mind, Nevets3 and 4 where created within 5 minutes of eachother and WHERE NEVER USED.

The username which was made only minutes after the first two was the one got blocked because they suspected i was promoting the aids denialist group.

And Nevets20, well they already know about Nevets20.

So which one of those accounts then have i used a sock puppet account to cause a violation? appart from the account where the username was identical to the article, i have made no violations. Infact two of the accounts i forgot about and never used.

So hurrah, i am a "SockMASTER".

My experience on wikipedia has been complete HELL

(Rant over....apologies to anyone that had to read all that)
Last edited by blackyblue on Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

blackyblue
Contributor
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 4:52 am
Actual Name: Steven Gall

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by blackyblue » Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:06 am

Why if i was not allowed to use "Nevets20" did they allow me to edit????
Unless they have blocked my URL, surely then that means i am allowed to edit with this username????

Also dont they think, that if i was any kind of sockmaster with any savvie, i would at least go to the library and create different users under a different URL????

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

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Mason » Mon Feb 29, 2016 7:42 am

:welcome:

What you've encountered is, sadly, a very common experience among new users. I'm sorry you are being treated this way. I will see if I can help get you unblocked.

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

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Mason » Mon Feb 29, 2016 9:29 am

OK, you are unblocked now.

Thank you for telling your story here... for every editor like you who explains what you've been through, there are countless others who just give up in frustration. One of the cruel paradoxes of Wikipedia is that newbie mistakes can get you an indefinite block with little obvious recourse, but if you appear to know all the rules right out of the gate, you can get an indefinite block for appearing to be a "returning editor abusing multiple accounts."

It can be quite kafkaesque sometimes.

blackyblue
Contributor
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 4:52 am
Actual Name: Steven Gall

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by blackyblue » Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:33 am

Thank you Mason for your understanding.
Knowing i am not the only one to encounter this type of problem is slightly reassuring.

User avatar
Zoloft
Trustee
Posts: 13984
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:54 pm
Wikipedia User: Stanistani
Wikipedia Review Member: Zoloft
Actual Name: William Burns
Nom de plume: William Burns
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Zoloft » Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:36 am

Move slowly, you need to become familiar with the methods of editing a wiki, stay on one account, and do uncontroversial edits for a while. If your edit is reverted, go to the article's talk page, and politely discuss it there.

You'll be less likely to become shark chum. Also, team up with more experienced editors. Ask questions on their talk pages.

Good luck!

My avatar is sometimes indicative of my mood:
  • Actual mug ◄
  • Uncle Cornpone
  • Zoloft bouncy pill-thing


Hex
Retired
Posts: 4130
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:40 pm
Wikipedia User: Scott
Location: London
Contact:

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Hex » Mon Feb 29, 2016 11:08 am

Great first post! Welcome, and I likewise offer sympathy for the shitty treatment you received. The number of people on Wikipedia that should not be allowed to interact with new editors is huge. Unfortunately, they do.
My question, to this esteemed Wiki community, is this: Do you think that a Wiki could successfully generate a useful encyclopedia? -- JimboWales
Yes, but in the end it wouldn't be an encyclopedia. It would be a wiki. -- WardCunningham (Jan 2001)

LynnWysong
Banned
Posts: 977
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:24 pm

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by LynnWysong » Mon Feb 29, 2016 11:10 am

blackyblue wrote:Thank you Mason for your understanding.
Knowing i am not the only one to encounter this type of problem is slightly reassuring.
You are definitely not the only one who has experienced this. Almost every new editor is immediately suspected of being a sock or a paid editor. I had even done extensive editing on some obscure subjects where no one paid any attention to me, but the minute I came into conflict with one of the sharks I was accused of and blocked for being a sock. WPs failure to figure out how to effectively deal with socking and its Lord of the Flies culture of long term editors drives off new editors in droves. Good Luck.

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Poetlister » Mon Feb 29, 2016 1:03 pm

Mason wrote:It can be quite kafkaesque sometimes.
Are you suggesting that this is user Kafkaesque (T-C-L)? :D
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

blackyblue
Contributor
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 4:52 am
Actual Name: Steven Gall

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by blackyblue » Mon Feb 29, 2016 7:01 pm

Just to say a big thanks to all those that replied.
Especially to MASON if he did carry through with his promise of helping me become unblocked.

I have just checked my email and i have a message from Wikipedia, and they give no explanation whatsoever, only saying "The situation has been resolved and you can now log in to your new account".

I logged in, and right enough i am able to edit and my page is clean of any accusations of being a sock.

Thanks again!

Beeblebrox
Habitué
Posts: 3787
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:30 pm
Wikipedia User: Just Step Sideways
Location: The end of the road, Alaska

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Beeblebrox » Mon Feb 29, 2016 7:16 pm

blackyblue wrote:Just to say a big thanks to all those that replied.
Especially to MASON if he did carry through with his promise of helping me become unblocked.

I have just checked my email and i have a message from Wikipedia, and they give no explanation whatsoever, only saying "The situation has been resolved and you can now log in to your new account".

I logged in, and right enough i am able to edit and my page is clean of any accusations of being a sock.

Thanks again!
That was me, I saw your request in the UTRS queue. When I looked into it it seemed you were already unblocked (hadn't seen this thread yet at the time). The reason I offered no further explanation was that I had nothing to do with it and it was a confusing mess. Rather than trying to untangle it I just closed your appeal since it was no longer needed.
information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom

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

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Mason » Mon Feb 29, 2016 7:45 pm

blackyblue wrote:Just to say a big thanks to all those that replied.
Especially to MASON if he did carry through with his promise of helping me become unblocked.
You're welcome! Glad to help.

Keep in mind Zoloft's suggestions above, and you should do fine. Good luck!

blackyblue
Contributor
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 4:52 am
Actual Name: Steven Gall

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by blackyblue » Mon Feb 29, 2016 7:55 pm

Beeblebrox wrote:
blackyblue wrote:Just to say a big thanks to all those that replied.
Especially to MASON if he did carry through with his promise of helping me become unblocked.

I have just checked my email and i have a message from Wikipedia, and they give no explanation whatsoever, only saying "The situation has been resolved and you can now log in to your new account".

I logged in, and right enough i am able to edit and my page is clean of any accusations of being a sock.

Thanks again!
That was me, I saw your request in the UTRS queue. When I looked into it it seemed you were already unblocked (hadn't seen this thread yet at the time). The reason I offered no further explanation was that I had nothing to do with it and it was a confusing mess. Rather than trying to untangle it I just closed your appeal since it was no longer needed.
Ok well thanks Beeblebrox.
In future i will be making no more accounts and this will be my only one.
So no more confusing messes.

I apologise for the mess created, and i acknowledge the admins are just trying to do a good job and keep the place from "being a mess".

Thanks

blackyblue
Contributor
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 4:52 am
Actual Name: Steven Gall

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by blackyblue » Mon Feb 29, 2016 7:58 pm

Zoloft wrote:Move slowly, you need to become familiar with the methods of editing a wiki, stay on one account, and do uncontroversial edits for a while. If your edit is reverted, go to the article's talk page, and politely discuss it there.

You'll be less likely to become shark chum. Also, team up with more experienced editors. Ask questions on their talk pages.

Good luck!
Good advice, will bare in mind.

Beeblebrox
Habitué
Posts: 3787
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:30 pm
Wikipedia User: Just Step Sideways
Location: The end of the road, Alaska

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Beeblebrox » Mon Feb 29, 2016 7:59 pm

blackyblue wrote:
Beeblebrox wrote:
blackyblue wrote:Just to say a big thanks to all those that replied.
Especially to MASON if he did carry through with his promise of helping me become unblocked.

I have just checked my email and i have a message from Wikipedia, and they give no explanation whatsoever, only saying "The situation has been resolved and you can now log in to your new account".

I logged in, and right enough i am able to edit and my page is clean of any accusations of being a sock.

Thanks again!
That was me, I saw your request in the UTRS queue. When I looked into it it seemed you were already unblocked (hadn't seen this thread yet at the time). The reason I offered no further explanation was that I had nothing to do with it and it was a confusing mess. Rather than trying to untangle it I just closed your appeal since it was no longer needed.
Ok well thanks Beeblebrox.
In future i will be making no more accounts and this will be my only one.
So no more confusing messes.

I apologise for the mess created, and i acknowledge the admins are just trying to do a good job and keep the place from "being a mess".

Thanks
I don't think you need to be apologizing, it was clearly an innocent mistake and my fellow admins misinterpreted it and over reacted. Luckily it's been cleared up now.
information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by thekohser » Mon Feb 29, 2016 8:23 pm

Beeblebrox wrote:Luckily it's been cleared up now.
Yes, indeed. Another volunteer reinserted in the noble cause of assembling the sum of human knowledge in one place. Huzzah!
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31489
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Vigilant » Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:13 pm

thekohser wrote:
Beeblebrox wrote:Luckily it's been cleared up now.
Yes, indeed. Another volunteer reinserted in the noble cause of assembling the sum of human knowledge in one place. Huzzah!
Poor blackyblue doesn't have the last 10 years of history to fall back on and realize that he's one of thousands who have been summarily executed at the feet of the admin corps for similar such transgressions.

You can almost hear the distinctive ANI drawl, "Y'all ain't from 'round here, is ya?"
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

LynnWysong
Banned
Posts: 977
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:24 pm

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by LynnWysong » Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:15 pm

Vigilant wrote:
thekohser wrote:
Beeblebrox wrote:Luckily it's been cleared up now.
Yes, indeed. Another volunteer reinserted in the noble cause of assembling the sum of human knowledge in one place. Huzzah!
Poor blackyblue doesn't have the last 10 years of history to fall back on and realize that he's one of thousands who have been summarily executed at the feet of the admin corps for similar such transgressions.

You can almost hear the distinctive ANI drawl, "Y'all ain't from 'round here, is ya?"
:rotfl:

Beeblebrox
Habitué
Posts: 3787
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:30 pm
Wikipedia User: Just Step Sideways
Location: The end of the road, Alaska

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Beeblebrox » Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:22 pm

thekohser wrote:
Beeblebrox wrote:Luckily it's been cleared up now.
Yes, indeed. Another volunteer reinserted in the noble cause of assembling the sum of human knowledge in one place. Huzzah!
I didn't say everything wrong with Wikipedia was fixed, just this one little thing.
information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Poetlister » Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:34 pm

And all because this editor had the sense to come here. We can be proud of the site. :)
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

Beeblebrox
Habitué
Posts: 3787
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:30 pm
Wikipedia User: Just Step Sideways
Location: The end of the road, Alaska

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Beeblebrox » Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:40 pm

Poetlister wrote:And all because this editor had the sense to come here. We can be proud of the site. :)
There's a reason people like me read this site and even comment here, despite the sometimes hostile environment.
information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Poetlister » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:59 pm

Beeblebrox wrote:
Poetlister wrote:And all because this editor had the sense to come here. We can be proud of the site. :)
There's a reason people like me read this site and even comment here, despite the sometimes hostile environment.
Yes, good for you and the more the merrier. Tell your friends!
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

SneakySasha
Contributor
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2015 8:47 am

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by SneakySasha » Tue Mar 01, 2016 11:25 pm

Ah, I always wonder which newbies are better off. Those editors who get banned from Wikipedia immediately, or those editors who do not!

User avatar
Earthy Astringent
Banned
Posts: 1548
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 7:16 am

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Earthy Astringent » Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:27 am

My advice, find a new hobby. You don't need them.

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Poetlister » Wed Mar 02, 2016 7:19 pm

SneakySasha wrote:Ah, I always wonder which newbies are better off. Those editors who get banned from Wikipedia immediately, or those editors who do not!
Presumably, everyone we disapprove of on the site was a newbie once. Who can tell which newbie will surmount the initial obstacles and go on to be a dreadful admin, checkuser or even WMF employee?
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

SneakySasha
Contributor
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2015 8:47 am

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by SneakySasha » Thu Mar 03, 2016 7:54 pm

Poetlister wrote:
SneakySasha wrote:Ah, I always wonder which newbies are better off. Those editors who get banned from Wikipedia immediately, or those editors who do not!
Presumably, everyone we disapprove of on the site was a newbie once. Who can tell which newbie will surmount the initial obstacles and go on to be a dreadful admin, checkuser or even WMF employee?
Hm, I guess my thinking is that most individuals would be better off not becoming Wikipedia editors ever. No matter how good they might be at editing Wikipedia. There does, however, seem to be some research which suggests that Wikipedia is actually better at running off good editors, then it is at keeping them.

User avatar
Kumioko
Muted
Posts: 6609
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
Nom de plume: Persona non grata

Re: My Wikipedia Hell

Unread post by Kumioko » Thu Mar 03, 2016 8:09 pm

SneakySasha wrote:
Poetlister wrote:
SneakySasha wrote:Ah, I always wonder which newbies are better off. Those editors who get banned from Wikipedia immediately, or those editors who do not!
Presumably, everyone we disapprove of on the site was a newbie once. Who can tell which newbie will surmount the initial obstacles and go on to be a dreadful admin, checkuser or even WMF employee?
Hm, I guess my thinking is that most individuals would be better off not becoming Wikipedia editors ever. No matter how good they might be at editing Wikipedia. There does, however, seem to be some research which suggests that Wikipedia is actually better at running off good editors, then it is at keeping them.
I know I honestly wished I had never started editing and wasted all that time but I did and I can't take it back. At this point and after doing all those edits and spending all that time (almost ten years and about 500, 000 edits) I feel like I have a vested interest in its success. As such, I am going to continue to edit regardless of what a few think.

With that said, I cannot tell people enough not to bother editing. Until something is done to change the toxic editing environment, the 'us and them' mentality of the admins, and the current culture of thinking that editors are worthless expendable commodities than can be thrown away and replaced at will, I wouldn't want anyone to start editing.

Post Reply