Wikicology - Another Essjay

[Vigilant]

But the press should be discussing this if the WMF have been getting all Nigerian Princed up in there.

It's easy to think that and it might even look like that at a glance, but if you really start digging into the guy's editing, it looks like it was done in good faith.

The case will be interesting.


RfB

We're going to have to disagree again.
I'll expect you to be up to date on my grooming at the end of this fiasco...

[AndyTheGrump]

The press might be interested either way - it certainly doesn't look good when a charity hands out cash without even rudimentary verification. I'm inclined to agree with RfB though - this looks to me more like a Walter Mitty than a professional scammer. Too much of a long game, and too much initial effort put into drawing attention for no obvious benefit.

Though come to think of it, it is possible to be both a Walter Mitty and a scammer - to believe that you are some sort of high-level con artist, while actually being crap at it. And no doubt to be successful up to a point, if your 'mark' is equally as incompetent. Not that I'm suggesting this is necessarily the case here. Incompetence all round explains it well enough without having to assume any conspiracy...

[Randy from Boise]

I'm inclined to agree with RfB though - this looks to me more like a Walter Mitty than a professional scammer. Too much of a long game, and too much initial effort put into drawing attention for no obvious benefit.

Nicely put.

Though come to think of it, it is possible to be both a Walter Mitty and a scammer - to believe that you are some sort of high-level con artist, while actually being crap at it.

Also possible.

RfB

[Poetlister]

if you really start digging into the guy's editing, it looks like it was done in good faith.

That's quite an impressive piece of WP:AGF. Of course, it's not easy to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he didn't realise that putting in fake and misleading references is a bad thing. However, I think that most people can decide what the balance of probabilities is.

[Ming]

This guy is the classic passive-aggressive incompetent who it takes way too much work to get rid of because "content issues!" means that since he isn't a profanity-spewing jackass there's no problem with his behavior. Ming has managed to get rid of several of these but in each case it took a long record of people bitching about cleaning up after them and in one case a trip to ARBCOM. The sad truth is that a lot of not-1st-world contributors (and especially Africans and Indians) are nice people who just don't understand how to do the work.

[Peter Damian]

Evidence presented by Ocaasi (T-C-L) (WMF)
[…]
Whether they have inflated their resume, or edited without competence, I still finding it striking, and touching, and even inspiring that of all the things one could theoretically choose to try and become, even under potentially false pretenses, that they chose to become one of us.
(link)

[Peter Damian]

But the press should be discussing this if the WMF have been getting all Nigerian Princed up in there.

It's easy to think that and it might even look like that at a glance, but if you really start digging into the guy's editing, it looks like it was done in good faith.

The case will be interesting.


RfB

And the lying was done in good faith?

Btw this proves what I suspected, namely that in order to write a very large number of apparently well-referenced articles he (a) copied large chunks of of text from other articles, some of them entirely unrelated to the subject, or to each other then (b) added references from a Google search in the same order as they appeared. Thus a quote from an article about Beryllium poisoning is placed in an article about NO2 poisoning, sourced to a paper on ventilation in underground car parking.

This case is interesting on many levels. The difficult of challenging such people – I got warned and could have been blocked again for doing this. The touching faith that Wikipedians have in people who say ‘sorry’ to important people (while at the same behaving with great meanness towards those they see as low in the pecking order). And of course the fact that this guy wrote 500 articles using this mechanical random sourcing that no one spotted. On articles that emergency services might use to treat for cases of poisoning. I pointed this out to one of the Wikipedians, and they said that doctors should not rely on Wikipedia. WTF.

[mendaliv]

Evidence presented by Ocaasi (T-C-L) (WMF)
[…]
Whether they have inflated their resume, or edited without competence, I still finding it striking, and touching, and even inspiring that of all the things one could theoretically choose to try and become, even under potentially false pretenses, that they chose to become one of us.
(link)

I hadn't seen that line. I'm baffled. I kinda hope Ocassi means "one of us" in terms of "a TWL helper" rather than a Wikipedian. That would actually make a little sense insofar as it'd show that TWL is a bigger deal than one on the inside might be used to thinking.

ETA:

But the press should be discussing this if the WMF have been getting all Nigerian Princed up in there.

It's easy to think that and it might even look like that at a glance, but if you really start digging into the guy's editing, it looks like it was done in good faith.

The case will be interesting.

RfB

And the lying was done in good faith?

As good a maxim it is in law, research, and honestly even in daily life, falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus (T-H-L) isn't really given much weight on WP.

[Peter Damian]

I hadn't seen that line. I'm baffled. I kinda hope Ocassi means "one of us" in terms of "a TWL helper" rather than a Wikipedian. That would actually make a little sense insofar as it'd show that TWL is a bigger deal than one on the inside might be used to thinking.

There is more rejoicing in heaven etc. It absolutely doesn't matter what you have done wrong. Repent, join in with the groupthink, and you will be saved. It's the standard way for cults to recruit.

[Peter Damian]

This guy is the classic passive-aggressive incompetent who it takes way too much work to get rid of because "content issues!" means that since he isn't a profanity-spewing jackass there's no problem with his behavior. Ming has managed to get rid of several of these but in each case it took a long record of people bitching about cleaning up after them and in one case a trip to ARBCOM. The sad truth is that a lot of not-1st-world contributors (and especially Africans and Indians) are nice people who just don't understand how to do the work.

Yup. Look at this beautiful investigation. It’s a lot of work, and for what.

[DanMurphy]

Evidence presented by Ocaasi (T-C-L) (WMF)
[…]
Whether they have inflated their resume, or edited without competence, I still finding it striking, and touching, and even inspiring that of all the things one could theoretically choose to try and become, even under potentially false pretenses, that they chose to become one of us.
(link)

Fuller quote from the Wikimedia Foundation's Jake Orlowitz, who goes by the handle "Ocaasi":

I still ponder that someone in an emerging global community wanted so much to be a part of our community and earn its esteem that this is the role they have chosen to build with their time. Whether they have inflated their resume, or edited without competence, I still finding it striking, and touching, and even inspiring that of all the things one could theoretically choose to try and become, even under potentially false pretenses, that they chose to become one of us.

That the comment that is simultaneously the most self-involved and self-congratulatory, while combining racist condescension and monumental stupidity, I have ever seen on Wikipedia came from a Wikimedia Foundation employee is hardly surprising. That Mr. Orlowitz was rewarded with his position for his role in creating the ghastly and monumentally stupid "Wikipedia Adventure" (designed to encourage more young children to write their articles and created in close collaboration with Derrick Coetzee, since globally banned, probably due to his advocacy for pedophiles on Wikipedia) almost makes this the gormless singularity.

[Kingsindian]

The evidence presented by EdChem is also interesting.

It's rather hard to accept any claim of good faith for Wikicology here. Either this is deliberate fakery or monumental incompetence. The two need not be mutually exclusive, of course.

[thekohser]

Evidence presented by Ocaasi (T-C-L) (WMF)
[…]
Whether they have inflated their resume, or edited without competence, I still finding it striking, and touching, and even inspiring that of all the things one could theoretically choose to try and become, even under potentially false pretenses, that they chose to become one of us.
(link)

Jake, that's an alarm bell, not a choir of angels.

[greyed.out.fields]

Evidence presented by Ocaasi (T-C-L) (WMF)
[…]
Whether they have inflated their resume, or edited without competence, I still finding it striking, and touching, and even inspiring that of all the things one could theoretically choose to try and become, even under potentially false pretenses, that they chose to become one of us.
(link)

Gabba gabba hey!

[Randy from Boise]

But the press should be discussing this if the WMF have been getting all Nigerian Princed up in there.

It's easy to think that and it might even look like that at a glance, but if you really start digging into the guy's editing, it looks like it was done in good faith.

The case will be interesting.


RfB

And the lying was done in good faith?

Nope, I never said that.


t

[Ming]

But the press should be discussing this if the WMF have been getting all Nigerian Princed up in there.

It's easy to think that and it might even look like that at a glance, but if you really start digging into the guy's editing, it looks like it was done in good faith.

The case will be interesting.


RfB

And the lying was done in good faith?

In a sense, it probably was. Other cultures don't place the sort of absolute value on truthtelling that we do.

[Vigilant]

I wonder how many more gems in the rough like this guy we're going to find an wikipedia continues to encourage the "global south" to participate.

Culture clashes ahoy.

[DanMurphy]

Evidence presented by Ocaasi (T-C-L) (WMF)
[…]
Whether they have inflated their resume, or edited without competence, I still finding it striking, and touching, and even inspiring that of all the things one could theoretically choose to try and become, even under potentially false pretenses, that they chose to become one of us.
(link)

Jake, that's an alarm bell, not a choir of angels.

Jake Orlowitz also notes at the case page, completely without irony or reflection, that "I wrote a personal letter to the German Visa Office affirming Wikicology's contributions as an editor. These were based off of the published articles about him." (The published articles, as we now know, were filled with this fellow's self-serving lies.)

Back to lurking. Even by Wikimedia Foundation standards, this one is special.

[Poetlister]

I wonder how many more gems in the rough like this guy we're going to find an wikipedia continues to encourage the "global south" to participate.

Culture clashes ahoy.

I expect that there are people like him in the "global north" too. Essjay is a white American, after all.

[Peter Damian]

He claims here that he works at "Dynamics medical laboratory and diagnostics service", and has recently altered his LinkedIn page to say the same thing). (Previously the page said he was a biochemist/researcher at isaacolat biomedical services). A Google search on “"Dynamics medical laboratory and diagnostics service" yields nothing except that LinkedIn page.

By contrast here he says “I obtained a bachelors degree in Biochemistry from Adekunle Ajasin University. I worked briefly as a college teacher and a medical laboratory scientist before I decided to obtain a postgraduate degree in Environmental biochemistry.”

Furthermore he also says that the 'Interim Bachelor of Science degree certificate' is supposedly interim 'because it can take 3-5 years to retrieve the original from Nigerian universities'. What?

[Peter Damian]

As noted by Xeno and others in the case statements, Wikicology was made WP:Autopatrolled by English Wikipedia. To be given the autopatrolled right, the "permission is granted only to accounts that have extensively demonstrated their knowledge of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines . . .". The basis for the permission is "extensively demonstrated" by examination of Wikicology's editing of content (ie., not what they say, what they do), particularly the content in his creation of articles (that obviously does not mean perfect but it does mean good enough). Thus, either we have an editor that has in the past proven his capability and acts of good for project content, or we have a severe failure of English Wikipedia administration. (link)

Emphasis mine.

[Vigilant]

As noted by Xeno and others in the case statements, Wikicology was made WP:Autopatrolled by English Wikipedia. To be given the autopatrolled right, the "permission is granted only to accounts that have extensively demonstrated their knowledge of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines . . .". The basis for the permission is "extensively demonstrated" by examination of Wikicology's editing of content (ie., not what they say, what they do), particularly the content in his creation of articles (that obviously does not mean perfect but it does mean good enough). Thus, either we have an editor that has in the past proven his capability and acts of good for project content, or we have a severe failure of English Wikipedia administration. (link)

Emphasis mine.

The longer the wikicology case festers on with en.wp admins and ARBCOM clerks running interference, the more grievous the final explosion will be.

[mendaliv]

I'm not particularly expecting a siteban to emerge from this discussion case, though I expect one could be gotten as soon as Wikicology screws up again.

What I really want to see is an acknowledgement that editors have a duty not to give materially false or misleading information about themselves, and that they're responsible for correcting material misunderstandings about their credentials that come out.

I'm still working on my evidence package, but the RfA is what I'm hanging my hat on as far as culpable acts or omissions is concerned.

[Peter Damian]

I'm not particularly expecting a siteban to emerge from this discussion case, though I expect one could be gotten as soon as Wikicology screws up again.

What I really want to see is an acknowledgement that editors have a duty not to give materially false or misleading information about themselves, and that they're responsible for correcting material misunderstandings about their credentials that come out.

I'm still working on my evidence package, but the RfA is what I'm hanging my hat on as far as culpable acts or omissions is concerned.

So all the other lying, misrepresentation and hat collecting (the last by writing articles about poison symptoms using random citations to avoid the citation police) is of course irrelevant to the Wikipediot community? True, but I see no trace of irony in what you say.

[edit]There was someone else who said something like this. I think it was on the discussion on Jimmy's page where it was said that falsifying credentials was OK, so long as they weren't admin credentials, which is very very bad.

[mendaliv]

I'm not particularly expecting a siteban to emerge from this discussion case, though I expect one could be gotten as soon as Wikicology screws up again.

What I really want to see is an acknowledgement that editors have a duty not to give materially false or misleading information about themselves, and that they're responsible for correcting material misunderstandings about their credentials that come out.

I'm still working on my evidence package, but the RfA is what I'm hanging my hat on as far as culpable acts or omissions is concerned.

So all the other lying, misrepresentation and hat collecting (the last by writing articles about poison symptoms using random citations to avoid the citation police) is of course irrelevant to the Wikipediot community? True, but I see no trace of irony in what you say.

[edit]There was someone else who said something like this. I think it was on the discussion on Jimmy's page where it was said that falsifying credentials was OK, so long as they weren't admin credentials, which is very very bad.

Actually I plan on making arguments at the workshop stage based off those issues, but I'm letting others articulate the evidence about things like bad citations. The thematic ground I'm going on in evidence is going to be demonstrating a pattern of non-candor, focusing on the credential claims, especially as they relate to the RfA and similar "office seeking" activities. I believe the RfA in particular will work to blunt arguments that Wikicology merits more chances or the benefit of the doubt with respect to the bad references and the like. It just ties everything up with a neat bow.

[mendaliv]

Evidence just closed last night. Looks like Wikicology got in a bunch of stuff in the 11th hour... and appears to have breached the word limit pretty substantially. I'm not going to complain about that, though, since what he posted doesn't look very effective anyway. The fact that he can't even follow the rules now that we're at arbitration is telling, though.

[Vigilant]

Evidence just closed last night. Looks like Wikicology got in a bunch of stuff in the 11th hour... and appears to have breached the word limit pretty substantially. I'm not going to complain about that, though, since what he posted doesn't look very effective anyway. The fact that he can't even follow the rules now that we're at arbitration is telling, though.

That is some whiny, clingy shit he posted.

[mendaliv]

Evidence just closed last night. Looks like Wikicology got in a bunch of stuff in the 11th hour... and appears to have breached the word limit pretty substantially. I'm not going to complain about that, though, since what he posted doesn't look very effective anyway. The fact that he can't even follow the rules now that we're at arbitration is telling, though.

That is some whiny, clingy shit he posted.

What got me is the statement that he was actually aware that David Cannon calling him a "lecturer" was incorrect, but that he deliberately chose not to correct him because he feared drama.

That admission pretty much makes the case for me. All that's left is to argue (1) that because he accepted the nominating statement which contained misleading information, he endorsed it, (2) that editors should be held accountable for misleading practices at RfA, and (3) that the failure of the RfA does not excuse such deception.

[Vigilant]

Evidence just closed last night. Looks like Wikicology got in a bunch of stuff in the 11th hour... and appears to have breached the word limit pretty substantially. I'm not going to complain about that, though, since what he posted doesn't look very effective anyway. The fact that he can't even follow the rules now that we're at arbitration is telling, though.

That is some whiny, clingy shit he posted.

What got me is the statement that he was actually aware that David Cannon calling him a "lecturer" was incorrect, but that he deliberately chose not to correct him because he feared drama.

That admission pretty much makes the case for me. All that's left is to argue (1) that because he accepted the nominating statement which contained misleading information, he endorsed it, (2) that editors should be held accountable for misleading practices at RfA, and (3) that the failure of the RfA does not excuse such deception.

I'll say this again because I think it bears repeating.
I don't think he wrote most of the articles that bear his authorship.
I think he had someone else do the work, sloppily since he didn't oversee things well, and then he tried to cash in on the WMF grant making apparatus.

He's a grifter.

[mendaliv]

I'll say this again because I think it bears repeating.
I don't think he wrote most of the articles that bear his authorship.
I think he had someone else do the work, sloppily since he didn't oversee things well, and then he tried to cash in on the WMF grant making apparatus.

He's a grifter.

I think you're probably right about the authorship issue... But I can't prove it. If this weren't my first time practicing before ArbCom I'd feel more comfortable pushing the envelope.

My thought is that the best outcome here will be a siteban, which there was a rough consensus to support at ANI. I don't think ArbCom will do mentorship; I feel like there's no precedent for that, and past principles suggest it's not their role to do that kind of thing. If they won't do a siteban and don't want to touch mentorship, then I think the two likely outcomes are a mainspace ban, or nothing, but noting that their doing nothing doesn't foreclose community action (at which point a siteban can possibly be obtained via AN).

From what I understand in the other evidence sections is that Wikicology is done getting grants unless he's completely cleared. When this incident started, I'd predicted that the meta folks would either circle the wagons to prevent their practices from looking tainted by scandal, or throw him to the lions to show that they are responsible. I don't think they're going to backpedal at this point unless Wikicology is completely cleared.

[mendaliv]

Workshop just closed yesterday. Unsurprisingly, Wikicology slid in with a big plea for mercy in the last hour. It's pretty bad. Here's my favorite passage so far (bolding mine):

I have been completely honest. I have admitted and explained as many mistakes as I could find in the time during this ArbCom case. I sometimes found mistakes I didn’t know about during the ArbCom case. I have been fixing articles and trying to work on the ArbCom case but I could not do the two at the same time. Here are mistakes I have fixed prior to using my sandbox; [5 diffs]. Here are the mistakes I have fixed using my sandbox; [19 diffs] I have been fixing mistakes and not covering my tracks. That is all I have been doing and responding to issues raised at ArbCom. since SlimVirgin gave me that instruction here. Later an Arbitrator told me to fix mistakes to an articles in my sandbox. I have already been fixing mistakes but not in my sandbox. Then I fixed mistakes in my sandbox. The the Arbitrator said I was to fix multiple articles in my sandbox and I am working as fast as I can to do that now while working with electricity out here and also preparing explanations for the Workshop page at the same time. I cannot do as much article fixing as fast as I would like because I also have to write here and communicate with ArbCom. I still want to be completely honest with every mistakes I made. These are the mistakes I have identify.

It's just so bad. So, so bad.

[darreg]

This is a very interesting topic. What will be even more interesting will be the decision by the ArbCom. A part of me wants to have pity for Wikicology. But I fear for the effect of his continued edit behavior on other Wikipedians in the future. I was one of the first Wikipedian to notice the anomalies in his approach on Wikipedia. He has a way of pulling the plug on people. I nearly abandoned my zeal (well...actually my account) to create Nigerian articles because of him. I didn't even care about anything anymore because of him. I do not think he possess the minimum intellectual requirement needed to be an editor on Wikipedia.

What is even more surprising (to me) is that Wikimedia gave him money to get prospective Wikipedians in under-populated universities. I am presently doing my Masters at the University of Ibadan, I plan on even doing a better job with my own resources there. I also agree with the notion that Wikipedians are born, not made. At least no one advertised Wikipedia to me. I saw the need to fill a knowledge gap then decided to join Wikipedia. I think Wikimedia Nigeria should instead spend their money on meetups among active Wikipedians in Nigeria. The meetings should be to devise ways of getting more materials (pictures, references, videos, text) for
Nigerian articles on Wikipedia.

[Hex]

darreg.

[darreg]

darreg.

Thank you. This is one of the very few places where I can speak my mind on WP without being blocked.

[mendaliv]

This is a very interesting topic. What will be even more interesting will be the decision by the ArbCom. A part of me wants to have pity for Wikicology. But I fear for the effect of his continued edit behavior on other Wikipedians in the future. I was one of the first Wikipedian to notice the anomalies in his approach on Wikipedia. He has a way of pulling the plug on people. I nearly abandoned my zeal (well...actually my account) to create Nigerian articles because of him. I didn't even care about anything anymore because of him. I do not think he possess the minimum intellectual requirement needed to be an editor on Wikipedia.

What is even more surprising (to me) is that Wikimedia gave him money to get prospective Wikipedians in under-populated universities. I am presently doing my Masters at the University of Ibadan, I plan on even doing a better job with my own resources there. I also agree with the notion that Wikipedians are born, not made. At least no one advertised Wikipedia to me. I saw the need to fill a knowledge gap then decided to join Wikipedia. I think Wikimedia Nigeria should instead spend their money on meetups among active Wikipedians in Nigeria. The meetings should be to devise ways of getting more materials (pictures, references, videos, text) for
Nigerian articles on Wikipedia.

The funding process is actually quite cool, and generally very friendly. This is just one of the cases where its mandate to use WMF funds to remove barriers to access and content creation was (allegedly) abused. You really don't have to be anybody special to get a grant... that's very much the SF attitude bleeding into it, and given great things have been done by people even lacking high school diplomas out there, it clearly has the potential to work. What went wrong with Wikicology, though, was that there weren't enough hurdles. Like, the way it ought to work is that "new" grant seekers should ideally have worked as co-organizers on a couple grants in the past with experienced grant seekers, or their first grant should be capped around $500... and actually enforcing an "objective measures of success" requirement (i.e., setting measurable goals and showing that you've met them) before allowing a second or third grant. It's not bulletproof, but I think it would've kept Wikicology from getting as much funding as he did.

What I am curious about is what your opinion is of the other members of the Nigerian Wikimedian crowd, if you encountered any of them on WP. I'm of the opinion that if these folks are honest and decent, then we have a responsibility to spur on any effort in Nigeria around those people, and prevent any sort of witch-hunt from driving them out.

[Vigilant]

You really don't have to be anybody special to get a grant... that's very much the SF attitude bleeding into it, and given great things have been done by people even lacking high school diplomas out there, it clearly has the potential to work. What went wrong with Wikicology, though, was that there weren't enough hurdles. Like, the way it ought to work is that "new" grant seekers should ideally have worked as co-organizers on a couple grants in the past with experienced grant seekers, or their first grant should be capped around $500... and actually enforcing an "objective measures of success" requirement (i.e., setting measurable goals and showing that you've met them) before allowing a second or third grant.

Maybe when they fix the grant process, they can apply these metrics to WMF engineering or the Board of Trustees.

[mendaliv]

Proposed decision is up, and voting is starting. I'm pretty disappointed how they're mostly sidestepping the RfA issue. I mean, the guy flat out lied in the RfA, and admitted during the evidence phase that he did so intentionally (to avoid drama).

But it looks like he's getting site banned, so whatever. Maybe there'll be room for an RfC on RfA standards of conduct after this case.

[Randy from Boise]

Proposed decision is up, and voting is starting. I'm pretty disappointed how they're mostly sidestepping the RfA issue. I mean, the guy flat out lied in the RfA, and admitted during the evidence phase that he did so intentionally (to avoid drama).

But it looks like he's getting site banned, so whatever. Maybe there'll be room for an RfC on RfA standards of conduct after this case.

First off, kudos to Opabinia r., Kelapstick, and Kirill for getting the Proposed Decision up on schedule, which is so rare an event at ArbCom that the Signpost should be alerted...

Second, finding of fact no. 3 does touch upon the RFA dishonesty.

Third, the site ban is not certain, but a very early proposal as of this writing. It is certainly on the table but the result is at this moment unclear.

RfB

[mendaliv]

Proposed decision is up, and voting is starting. I'm pretty disappointed how they're mostly sidestepping the RfA issue. I mean, the guy flat out lied in the RfA, and admitted during the evidence phase that he did so intentionally (to avoid drama).

But it looks like he's getting site banned, so whatever. Maybe there'll be room for an RfC on RfA standards of conduct after this case.

First off, kudos to Opabinia r., Kelapstick, and Kirill for getting the Proposed Decision up on schedule, which is so rare an event at ArbCom that the Signpost should be alerted...

Second, finding of fact no. 3 does touch upon the RFA dishonesty.

Third, the site ban is not certain, but a very early proposal as of this writing. It is certainly on the table but the result is at this moment unclear.

RfB

Yeah, I don't know how I missed that part of FoF 3. No coffee yesterday morning wasn't helpful.

That said, as of this morning we're 6/0 in favor of a siteban, and 3/3 on mentorship (with the 3 supporters declaring it a second choice after siteban). So two supports shy of the siteban being pretty much certain.

[Vigilant]

I still have no idea why ARBCOM can't see wikiclogy for what he is.
A grifter.

[Cedric]

I still have no idea why ARBCOM can't see wikiclogy for what he is.
A grifter.

In my experience, blithering incompetence has a marked tendency to induce blindness, or to substantially aggravate pre-existing blindness. No surprises here.

[AndyTheGrump]

I still have no idea why ARBCOM can't see wikiclogy for what he is.
A grifter.

If by 'grifter' you mean someone who intentionally signed up to Wikipedia for the purposes of extracting funds under false pretences, I'd have to say he's a remarkably incompetent one...

[mendaliv]

I still have no idea why ARBCOM can't see wikiclogy for what he is.
A grifter.

I'm not too bothered about that. They got to a siteban without having to conclude on his motives, almost entirely based on the evidence presented in the case. You could call it path of least resistance or judicial minimalism. Both observations are probably correct. I knew that would be a hard case from the beginning just based on how much of the benefit-seeking was done on meta rather than enwiki.

But his going after the admin bit on false pretenses just chaps me. I know they weren't going to do worse than ban him, but I really would have liked to see RfA reform come from this.

Also I'm glad they are going to adopt the biomedical and public health topic ban, and the upload ban. Even if he does come back it's going to make it next to impossible for him to do anything grant-related to have had sanctions that stem from images created at grant-funded events, and from editing in his primary field of study.

[Vigilant]

I still have no idea why ARBCOM can't see wikiclogy for what he is.
A grifter.

If by 'grifter' you mean someone who intentionally signed up to Wikipedia for the purposes of extracting funds under false pretences, I'd have to say he's a remarkably incompetent one...

I'd have to agree.
What's more notable is how long he's been able to run this feeble scam on en.wp and the WMF.

[Randy from Boise]

I still have no idea why ARBCOM can't see wikiclogy for what he is.
A grifter.

If by 'grifter' you mean someone who intentionally signed up to Wikipedia for the purposes of extracting funds under false pretences, I'd have to say he's a remarkably incompetent one...

I share the view that the simplest explanation is not correct here. There is a fairly large body of good-faith editing and the grant-seeking has been comparatively small potatoes and fairly ineffective.

I think the fact that he tried to put up his autobiography on WP 14 times (!!!) explains more about motivation than anything else. Being unclean with sourcing is the main party foul here.

RfB

[thekohser]

... the grant-seeking has been comparatively small potatoes and fairly ineffective.

Remember, though -- a dollar goes farther in Nigeria.

A Coca-cola at a restaurant will put you back only 45 cents. A bottle of wine at the market, $4.00. Gasoline is $1.79 a gallon. And a three-bedroom suburban apartment goes for only $580 a month.

[Randy from Boise]

... the grant-seeking has been comparatively small potatoes and fairly ineffective.

Remember, though -- a dollar goes farther in Nigeria.

A Coca-cola at a restaurant will put you back only 45 cents. A bottle of wine at the market, $4.00. Gasoline is $1.79 a gallon. And a three-bedroom suburban apartment goes for only $580 a month.

I took that into account. Very very petty-cash-ish dollar numbers for WMF.

RfB

[mendaliv]

There is now a majority in favor of a siteban. Unless Wikicology's promised argument in favor of mentorship sways the Arbs who have already voted, then he's gone.

And going by his arguments thus far, I expect it to be not only ineffective, but pretty damning.

[Vigilant]

This section is cringeworthy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... 7s_section

It's exactly the sort of earnest grovelling that ARBCOM loves.

[mendaliv]

This section is cringeworthy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... 7s_section

It's exactly the sort of earnest grovelling that ARBCOM loves.

Good god. He's bordering on incoherent.