[[User BuddhaInside]]'s antics on wiki are becoming a serious cause for
concern.
1. His has devoted much of his time to creating [[List of . . . ]] pages,
and when his generally ridiculed pages are deleted, he tries to create yet
more lists or bizarre renamed version of the list proposed for deletion.
For example, he created a [[List of heterosexuals]] which was generally
dismissed as nonsensical. When 28 people voted on it, after it was listed on
the VfD, 20 voted to delete (accompanied with scathing comments about the
list), 1 said 'delete or rename', 7 said keep. The debate went on for eight
days. When it finally was deleted, he went ballistic, claiming that there
was no consensus for its deletion (71%, or 75%, depending on how you
interpret the votes, said delete! No consensus???)
He then tried to edit the [[Consensus]] page to redefine what a consensus
is, forcing the comment Angela,
Changing the definition on the [[consensus]] page won't help Buddha . . .
[[User:Angela|Angela]] 18:04, Sep 14, 2003 (UTC)
He also created * [[List of heterosexuals]] not notable in connection with
their heterosexuality]]
* [[List of heterosexuals not noted for their heterosexuality]] (I deleted
these on the 6th. They were simply an attempt by him to create alternative
pages with the same contents as [[List of heterosexuals]] but without the
VfD boilerplate reference.)
His latest lists are [[List of famous black people]] and [[List of famous
white people]] which again have been listed by people on the VfD page. He is
the only defender of the lists. Among the criticism made is
# This is getting ridiculous. The next thing will be 'people with two arms',
or 'list of people without disabilities'. Please delete these stupid lists.
Mintguy 18:51, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)
The [[Protected Page]] contains -
* List of famous heterosexual people. Blanked and protected. Repeatedly
deleted page that keeps being resurrected. Angela 02:51, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)
o This page had a new title and new content, making it completely distinct
from any prior page. In addition, consensus was NOT reached on the deletion
of the prior page. -BuddhaInside
Today the same page contains:
* [[List of famous white people]], [[List of famous black people]] - more
trolling attempts by User:BuddhaInside; listed on Vfd. - Hephaestos 18:57,
14 Sep 2003 (UTC)
2. He is determined to silence any comments on his actions by deleting /all/
comments on his talk page, even though he is involved in many controversies
that people wish to ask him about. Erik summed up the situation on his talk
page with the following:
BuddhaInside, refusing to communicate with other users on your talk page by
consistently blanking it is not in the spirit of Wikiquette and WikiLove,
which are fundamental concepts of the Wikipedia community. Nor is your
behavior on the silly List of heterosexuals. You are welcome to make
contributions to Wikipedia, but if you continue with your current trolling,
it is likely that you will end up being banned. Please focus on useful
contributions instead of alienating other contributors. Thank you! Note that
this page might be protected if you continue to blank it, to guarantee that
at least these messages are a matter of public record.Eloquence 00:45, Sep
7, 2003 (UTC)
His response, as with every other comment, was to blank it.
His constant creating of frankly ridiculous pages, largely as revenge for
the deletion of his beloved [[List of heterosexuals]], is getting absurd and
annoying many users who find themselves undoing his nonsense and cleaning up
his mess. His refusal to tolerate comments on his talk page is outrageous.
Among users who have criticised his behavour on a range of pages are
Ark30inf
Eloquence
Angela
Martin
Hephaestos
Tweak
Wiwaxia
Unwilling though I am to contemplate it, I can't help wondering if this
user, with his preoccupation with lists and with provocatively challenging
people, and with blanking his page, is merely a troll. I can think of at
least two trolls in the past who specialised in list making and blanking
their user pages. At the very least, if BuddhaInside is a /real/ but
seriously misguided contributor, he needs to be told forceably and
unambiguously by the community that his behaviour is unacceptable and /has/
to change if he wants to remain a contributor.
JT
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Adam Raizen wrote:
>I would like to use a bot to upload articles on
>cities in Israel based on information from Israel's
>Central Bureau of Statistics (http://www.cbs.gov.il),
>a la Rambot. You can see an example article at
>[[User:AdamRaizen/Ramla]]. Any objections or
>comments?
I would like to see a demo article of what the output of the bot will be. We
can then discus ways to improve the content/format.
Also from
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bots
For the current situation, the burden of proof is on the bot-maker to
demonstrate the following:
The bot must be useful
The bot must be harmless
The bot must not be a server hog
The bot must be approved by someone
-- mav
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 23:18:03 +0100
> From: "james duffy" <jtdirl(a)hotmail.com>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] BuddhaInside's behaviour
> To: wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org
> Message-ID:
> <BAY1-F37sRC66IMSHkk0001d4af(a)hotmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>
> [[User BuddhaInside]]'s antics on wiki are becoming
> a serious cause for
> concern.
> BuddhaInside, refusing to communicate with other
> users on your talk page by
> consistently blanking it is not in the spirit of
> Wikiquette and WikiLove,
> which are fundamental concepts of the Wikipedia
> community.
Come to think about it, I was deeply troubled the day
I left a message to Evercat
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk%3AEvercat
and saw him just blanking his talk page soonafter with
no comment.
I first thought that a bit rude. Then I looked at the
history of his talk page, and saw he was used to do
that with every comment left to him.
Hence, I just thought it was his personal choice to do
so. Just as others refactor comments, or add
signatures to unsigned comments left on their pages.
Just different behaviors and approaches. User pages
where pov and different behaviors are just fine.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
> 1. His has devoted much of his time to creating [[List of . . . ]] pages,
> and when his generally ridiculed pages are deleted, he tries to create yet
> more lists or bizarre renamed version of the list proposed for deletion.
>
> For example, he created a [[List of heterosexuals]] which was generally
> dismissed as nonsensical. When 28 people voted on it, after it was listed on
> the VfD, 20 voted to delete (accompanied with scathing comments about the
> list), 1 said 'delete or rename', 7 said keep. The debate went on for eight
> days. When it finally was deleted, he went ballistic, claiming that there
> was no consensus for its deletion (71%, or 75%, depending on how you
> interpret the votes, said delete! No consensus???)
75% is not a consensus, I can understand a user getting angry if it is a
page s/he has spent a lot of time on. This user seems to rather be in a
deep disagreement with the majority of Wikipedia users/sysops rather
than a genuine troll. In general I agree.
BL
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 18:29:37 -0700
From: Brion Vibber <brion(a)pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] BuddhaInside's behaviour
To: Discussion list for English-language Wikipedia
<wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org>
Message-ID:
<1063589377.5317.21.camel(a)frank.vibber.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
On Sun, 2003-09-14 at 18:02, Angela wrote:
>> After being told that he could not have his user
page
>> deleted without good reason on both
>> [[Wikipedia:Personal subpages to be deleted]] and
on
>> his talk page, BuddhaInside started an edit war at
>> [[Wikipedia:Personal subpages to be deleted]].
>This seems like a remarkable waste of time. Why _not_
>delete the pages?
>They're not articles, they're user pages and that
>user requested their
>deletion.
Seconded. As mentionned in the title, these are
"personal" pages. Or not ?
The "public state record" is not lost. It may always
be seen by a sysop as a deleted page, and undeleted if
necessary.
So what is the point in refusing the deletion of a
*personal* page ? How wikilove is it to irritate
someone for such an unimportant point ?
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
After being told that he could not have his user page
deleted without good reason on both
[[Wikipedia:Personal subpages to be deleted]] and on
his talk page, BuddhaInside started an edit war at
[[Wikipedia:Personal subpages to be deleted]]. This
led to Hephaestos protecting the page. I left a
message on the page in case others needed pages
deleted and did not know how to go about it. My
message states:
*This page is currently protected* due to repeated
vandalism. If you have a *genuine* reason for
requesting a personal *subpage* of yours be deleted,
you are advised to contact an administrator directly
or to leave a request at the Village pump.
Following this, BuddhaInside started an edit war at
the village pump constantly requesting his pages be
deleted. I explained to him on his talk page that only
the deletion of subpages would occur, and this was not
the appropriate forum for requests for user pages to
be deleted. He immediately blanked his talk page and
carried on the edit war.
The following is the edit history up until the point
that I went to sleep;
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:48, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:47, Sep 15, 2003 . . Angela
(Reverted to last edit by Angela)
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:44, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:43, Sep 15, 2003 . . Angela
(Reverted to last edit by Jiang)
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:42, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:41, Sep 15, 2003 . . Jiang
(Reverted to last edit by Angela)
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:41, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:40, Sep 15, 2003 . . Angela
(Reverted to last edit by Angela)
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:39, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:38, Sep 15, 2003 . . Angela
(Reverted to last edit by Angela)
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:38, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:37, Sep 15, 2003 . . Angela
(Reverted to last edit by Angela)
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:36, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:35, Sep 15, 2003 . . Angela
(Reverted to last edit by Angela)
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:35, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:34, Sep 15, 2003 . . Angela
(Reverted to last edit by Angela)
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:32, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:31, Sep 15, 2003 . . Angela
(Reverted to last edit by Angela)
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:31, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:30, Sep 15, 2003 . . Angela
(Reverted to last edit by Angela)
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:29, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:26, Sep 15, 2003 . . Angela
(Reverted to last edit by Angela)
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:25, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:23, Sep 15, 2003 . . Angela
(Reverted to last edit by Angela)
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:21, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:20, Sep 15, 2003 . . Angela
(Reverted to last edit by Angela)
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:18, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:17, Sep 15, 2003 . . Angela
(Reverted to last edit by Angela)
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:16, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:15, Sep 15, 2003 . . Angela
(Reverted to last edit by Anthere)
# (cur) (last) . . M 01:13, Sep 15, 2003 . .
BuddhaInside
________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk
>Adam [name omitted for privacy reasons] and I have been having a long discussion, and he would
>like for me to reinstate him. He is of the belief that I am the only
>one who would be against this, although he does allow as there may be
>some complaints from those who have been most strongly against him in
>the past.
>
>However, at this point in time, I have no objections to his return,
>and would like to reinstate him under the name 'Adam [name omitted for privacy reasons]'.
>
>The interpersonal courtesies that would be expected of him at that
>point would be the same as expected of anyone. That is to say, he
>would not be on any sort of extra-special probation, although of
>course he should be aware that some people will be wary of him at
>first.
>
>The important thing, to me, is that Adam has approached this with me
>in the right way this time. We've talked it over, we've talked about
>various alternatives, and I feel comfortable with his sincerity. He's
>gone so far as to give me an example of an edit he would like to make,
>and the reasons for it, and it all sounded fine to me.
>
>The point of this letter is to ask people with strong objections and
>concerns to send them to me, and privately at first please, because
>this type of interpersonal matter is seldom made better by public
>argument. However, and in the interests of sunshine, if anyone has
>any complaints that they feel should be made public, go ahead with
>that if you must. I just think it'd be better if we cleared things
>up quietly and with dignity.
>
>I know this may be a controversial decision, and I want to make it
>carefully and with ample opportunity for people to express their
>views.
>
>--Jimbo
>
>P.S. for those concerned about the 'Pizza Puzzle' connection, please
>note that whether or not this user is in fact Adam (and he has told me
>directly that it is not him), PP has not edited anything in nearly a
>month and a half. So that's a problem in the past, I think.
If Adam
1. comes back as Adam,
2. edits as Adam and /only/ as Adam,
3. vows not to revert to running multiple personae
4. avoids personalised attacks on those he perceives as his 'enemies'
then I will support his reinstatement.
JT
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
I put [[Thomas Sutpen]] on the [[Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/copyvio]] page because it is a word-for-word copy from [[http://www.uic.edu/depts/engl/projects/dissertations/kdorwick/engl214/juan/…. [[User:Stevertigo]] rolled back the copyvio boilerplate I'd put on the page and said in [[Talk:Thomas Sutpen]]: "I rolled the copyvio deletion back because this little text --even if copied from an edu site does not constitute a problem for us. There was no copyright notice on the source page, it was not copied in full, and theres no reason why the effort placed in calling this a copyviolation cant be better put toward changing the text to make it unique."
I'm certainly not qualified to do anything to this article. I had no idea who Thomas Sutpen was until I read this article. Am I then not allowed to discuss the article because I can't change the text? I don't know what to change it to, I don't have the background to do so. In the meantime, does that mean that I have to leave all texts alone that I know are copyright violations because I don't have the expertise to change them?
Is Stevevertigo correct that, because the page doesn't specifically have a copyright on it, it's fair game to be stolen and incorporated onto Wikipedia? I can't believe that.
RickK
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
Tuf-Kat says:
> On another note, there has been doubt about his
> actual/perceived/desired gender. Since he is now
> apparently going by Adam, does that mean he would like
> us to refer to him as a male?
My understanding of transgender etiquette is that the best person to ask would be
Adam. No doubt he will be able to explain the situation to us once he's unbanned.
Talking of which, I'll be delighted to see his ban lifted. He has his weaknesses, as do
we all, but I've been able to work with his previous reincarnations, and I'm sure I'll be
able to work with him again. Indeed, considerably easier without the encumbrance of
a ban.
-Martin "MyRedDice" Harper