Mr. "Alkivar" blocked me too without justification recently. As an
administrator, he had NO E-MAIL address listed at the time where I could contact him.
Obscure? Hard to reach? Of course. This individual can exercise power over
editing and editing privileges at will. Pity you if he disagrees with you. Take
a look at what he has done on Wikipedia. And, then tell me WHY he is an
administrator. Can the Wikipedians who contribute constructively put up with
administrator nonsense and capricious behavior? NOT FOR LONG! The accomplished
individuals who originate, expand, or edit articles are quickly put off. I am
one of them. YES, I can PROVE that I am an internationally recognized expert in
my field. I need an administrator like "Mr Alkivar" or whomever to tell me
what I can write or can't write? No wonder the reputation of Wikipedia is
deteriorating on the Internet. I can only wish you luck in getting unblocked. I
suspect he can get away whatever he does and at this point nobody really
cares, do they?
Looks like she is still blocked. I don't see any autoblocks, so I am
not sure what is up. Could one of the tech guys take a look? Mike
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Earthhope Action Network <contact(a)earthhopenetwork.net>
Date: Apr 27, 2006 10:31 PM
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] blocked past block time
To: Michael Lindeen <wikikitty(a)gmail.com>
Hi Mike,
Yes, I am still blocked. I just checked to make sure. Can you get
someone with technical knowledge that can fix this thing?
I would really appreciate it.
thanks,
Maggie
On 4/27/06, Michael Lindeen <wikikitty(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Are you still blocked? I see that Drini tried unblocking you 2 more
> times. Let me know. Mike
>
> On 4/27/06, Earthhope Action Network <contact(a)earthhopenetwork.net > wrote:
> > Can someone please look into this?
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:… .
> >
> > I was blocked by Drini and then unblocked by Drini.
> > My block is supposed to be up, but for some reason I am still blocked.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Maggie thewolfstar
> >
> > --
> > in peace and justice for the wildthings,
> > Margie Laupheimer
> >
> > http://earthhopenetwork.net/
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
>
--
in peace and justice for the wildthings,
Margie Laupheimer
http://earthhopenetwork.net/
A fire hydrant which appeared in the background of a picture of me
published in the local weekly newspaper, which is a published, print
source and arguably a reliable source.
Before we put too much energy into hairsplitting as to whether this
fire hydrant is verifiable and therefore encyclopedic, click the
"random page" article and look at the article we already _have_.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fath_Jang_Mir_Osman_Ali_Khan_Asif_Jah_VII
--a biography with NO references at all
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renishaw_Hall
--OK assuming we accept the official website and a "gardenvisit"
website as reliable sources, which I do
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ardeşen
--A substub with NO references at all
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustaf_Skarsgård
--OK assuming we accept imdb as a reliable source, which I do
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagnetic_storm
--a long, well-written article about a scientific subject that has
_no_ explicit sources for any items in it. Could subtle vandalism be
detected in this article by anybody but the contributors of the
information? There are nine books under "suggested reading" and four
"see also" web references which probably could source most of the
information, but there's no way to locate which is the source, for,
say, the biology section, which is probably somewhat controversial.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MapleStory
--a long article about an MMORGP with no explicit references for any
particular facts in it, but a slew of external links to official
websites and fansites
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essequibo_Islands-West_Demerara
--A geography article with NO references at all
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_A._Evans
--A biography article with a single book listed as reference, but
apparently one would need to skim through the whole book to find the
sources for any of the facts in the article.
...and on and on it goes.
Probably less than 5% of Wikipedia's content actually meets [[WP:V]],
[[WP:CITE]], and [[WP:RS]]. P
robably much less than half of Wikipedia's content meets it even by
the most charitable interpretation, in which one a) assumes that
external links to websites run by organizations that are not
disinterested in their subject matter are reliable sources (I'm
thinking of things like websites about historic-house museums and the
like, which are probably mostly sorta-kinda-OK but probably are
inclined to present the "authorized-biography" view of things), and
b) assumes that most of the facts in the article could be found in
the externally linked websites.
Spot-checking, by the way, shows that that is often NOT the case.
Articles of that kind often start out as, well, paraphrases of
external website content, then gradually acquire an accumulation of
interesting things that, I believe, people think they know about the
topic and add to it, without bothering to add any supporting references.
Yes, of course, I shouldn't of left that out. I was invited to get an account by atleast 3 people, namely one individual who has "low patience" for anon editors. Fair enough, so I started up an accout, Neztielz. Unfortunatly, it was very late, and had some beer, so did not realise that Neztielz was an inappropriate name violating naming policy. PLAK, on the otherhand, I created with the hope of bringing peoples attention to the parts of the article that were full of misinformation and serious pov problems. The Cuba article is suffering through an extended fight between two groups of editors, and nothing is getting accomplished. I felt if i could just focus attention on some of the serious problems, perhaps some progress could be made. For example the infrastructure section literally only adresses positives prior to the revolution, and negatives following it. In reality, Cubas infrastrucure has grown, and continues to do so. While Cuba is behind in areas such as
telecommunications, in other areas it is doing quite well. While the actual edits made by PLAK were a little unscroupulous, I never used a secondary account to back up my work, or make others look bad.
Brian
That's an interesting story, brian, but it doesn't explain why you
first edited with an IP address, then had to create three separate
userids to edit that page, Neztielz, PLAK, and Mystork, before finally
using your real account Colle.
Jay.
On 4/27/06, brian <bs_politic(a)yahoo.ca> wrote:
> Hi, I was recently blocked by a great admin who seems to of gotten a
little jaded. The block was related to my alledged motives, which in
reality were quite good! Anyways, my block was supposed to end about 8
or 9 hours ago, so if someone with the know how would like to look into
it, please give me a hand!
>
> If you want to know why I was unjustly blocked (which I know you
really do) please read on! PLEASE!
>
> Well I had given up on wikipedia a few months ago, and had left my
user:colle account to gather some dust. But then you know what happens,
I ended up coming crawling back---but I was only going to edit one
article (Cuba). I read the article before I went to Cuba, so it has a bit
of sentimental value to me, but I digress. So I made a new account
rather than dig up the old password. Over a day or two I did some edits,
worked on a sandbox, and signed a RFC. Unfortunatly I was labled a
sockpuppet by an avatar and another user because I had unfortunatly appeared
minutes after a high-profile editor was banned indefinatly. So... I
went and found my old accounts password (very lucky), and then used that
account to prove I wasn't a sockpuppet by removing the "suspected
sockpuppet of.." template from my new userpage, and replacing it with one
stating "this user is the legitimate sock puppet of Colle." The next day
Sarah indef banned my legitimate sockpuppet, and gave me a 12
> hour break from editing. I've tried to explain the situation, but I
haven't had much progress getting back from her lately. I really don't
want people thinking I intentionally mess around with the system --it
is just how it happened. Also, I really didn't break any rules that I
know of. Thanks a bunch!
>
> Brian
---------------------------------
Share your photos with the people who matter at Yahoo! Canada Photos
On 27/04/06, David Boothroyd <david(a)election.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> I'm suffering from the opposite problem right now, as an elected
> local councillor (up for re-election in a week's time incidentally).
> Because I have a biographical article, editors that dislike my edits
> have been known to draw attention to it and assume that my editing
> must be biased. Worse, some have recently taken to directly
> threatening to make a political issue of it.
>
> I don't expect this actually to happen soon, but it seems to me that
> it's a form of harassment and a personal attack.
Huh. The last edits to that page were someone tagging it {{delete}}...
and that someone being a Conservative councillor in Wycombe who was
tagging the articles of all other local councillors!
Oh, the amusement.
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk
"Michael Lindeen" <wikikitty(a)gmail.com> writes:
>On 4/27/06, Pete Bartlett <pcb21(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>> The campaign manager of a candidate in the Georgia (*)
>> gubernatorial election has resigned after someone in his
>> office changed the bio of her opponent.
>>
>> Full story at:
> > http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/26/cox.wikipedia/
>>
>> Another reminder to us and our fellow editors of the huge
> > responsibilty we all bear these days to edit well.
>
>Yes. And as we get larger and more prominent, this will become more
>common, not less.
I'm suffering from the opposite problem right now, as an elected
local councillor (up for re-election in a week's time incidentally).
Because I have a biographical article, editors that dislike my edits
have been known to draw attention to it and assume that my editing
must be biased. Worse, some have recently taken to directly
threatening to make a political issue of it.
I don't expect this actually to happen soon, but it seems to me that
it's a form of harassment and a personal attack.
[[en:User:Dbiv]]
--
David Boothroyd - http://www.election.demon.co.uk
david(a)election.demon.co.uk (home)
dboothroyd(a)westminster.gov.uk (council)
Hi, I was recently blocked by a great admin who seems to of gotten a little jaded. The block was related to my alledged motives, which in reality were quite good! Anyways, my block was supposed to end about 8 or 9 hours ago, so if someone with the know how would like to look into it, please give me a hand!
If you want to know why I was unjustly blocked (which I know you really do) please read on! PLEASE!
Well I had given up on wikipedia a few months ago, and had left my user:colle account to gather some dust. But then you know what happens, I ended up coming crawling back---but I was only going to edit one article (Cuba). I read the article before I went to Cuba, so it has a bit of sentimental value to me, but I digress. So I made a new account rather than dig up the old password. Over a day or two I did some edits, worked on a sandbox, and signed a RFC. Unfortunatly I was labled a sockpuppet by an avatar and another user because I had unfortunatly appeared minutes after a high-profile editor was banned indefinatly. So... I went and found my old accounts password (very lucky), and then used that account to prove I wasn't a sockpuppet by removing the "suspected sockpuppet of.." template from my new userpage, and replacing it with one stating "this user is the legitimate sock puppet of Colle." The next day Sarah indef banned my legitimate sockpuppet, and gave me a 12
hour break from editing. I've tried to explain the situation, but I haven't had much progress getting back from her lately. I really don't want people thinking I intentionally mess around with the system --it is just how it happened. Also, I really didn't break any rules that I know of. Thanks a bunch!
Brian
---------------------------------
Have a question? Yahoo! Canada Answers. Go to Yahoo! Canada Answers
EFF Honors Craigslist, Gigi Sohn, and Jimmy Wales with Pioneer Awards
Electronic Frontier Foundation 4/27/2006 2:59:09 PM
15th Annual Ceremony Highlights Innovations in Information Technology
http://webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?SESSIONID=&aId=13281
"Jimmy Wales is the founder and president of the Wikimedia Foundation,
a non-profit corporation that operates Wikipedia – a free, online,
collaborative encyclopedia. Wikipedia started in January of 2001, and
now it's one of the most-used reference sites on the Internet, with
editions in over 200 languages. "
Congratulations for Jimmy :)
Mathias