In a message dated 12/15/2008 7:39:16 PM Pacific Standard Time,
shimgray(a)gmail.com writes:
In Wikipedia? No; embedding of external things is disabled.>>
-------
Not in wikipedia.
But in the wiki software, not wikipedia, a different wiki running the same
software
**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
favorite sites in one place. Try it now.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000…)
World Net Daily is about as meaningful as.... well it's just not.
No one cares what they think, so great, let them boycott us and boost our
ratings that much more.
No publicity is bad publicity.
Will Johnson
**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
favorite sites in one place. Try it now.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000…)
I encourage that anyone who has been harassed or threatened by Jeremy Hanson
(JarlaxleArtemis/Grawp) report it to his ISP, Verizon, at (214) 513-6711.
Refer to the residential DSL account of Ms. L.K. Zack-Hanson, (562)
431-7852. His most recent dynamic IP address, as of last night (12/13/08),
was 71.107.162.158. (He tried to e-mail bomb me from this IP last night,
which is how I know. -_-)
You can also try the Los Alamitos Police Department, (562) 594-7232,
<http://www.losalamitospolice.org/support/ineedhelp.htm>.
-Fran
-----Original Message-----
From: Jay Litwyn [mailto:brewhaha@edmc.net]
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2008 8:50 PM
To: abuse(a)verizon.net
Cc: Fran Rogers
Subject: [common assault] [IP masking] Re: [WikiEN-l] User:JarlaxleArtemis
I am interested in having someone personally investigate a complaint of
persistent threats, foul language and behaviour that discourages honest and
presentable work on wikipedia. While wikipedia is capable of blocking IP
numbers, this has uinintended effects against your users if they want to
make productive anonymous contributions. Also, when the user is capable of
using indirection, which seems to be the case, because his *behaviour*,
*characteristics of it*, and *cookie traces* hav been seen coming from
numbers that are not verizion. So, I ask you, please, for instructions about
what to do about it and which authorities you might involve? I will follow
this message up with a phone call, and I hope you will return it, even
though it is long distance. Fran Rogers is more familiar with the case than
I am.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fran Rogers" <fran(a)nutmeg.ws>
To: <wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 4:04 AM
Subject: [WikiEN-l] JarlaxleArtemis/Grawp
> You all may remember [[User:JarlaxleArtemis]], who has been "editing" the
> English Wikipedia since 2004, at age 15. Originally he was an apparently
> good-faith editor, but was sanctioned by ArbCom in early 2005 for somewhat
> immature outbursts, copyright violations, and erratic behavior; eventually
> he pulled such stunts as putting his teacher's e-mail address on his
> userpage encouraging people to harass the "fucking bitch," e-mail bombing
> people who deleted his copyvios, and finally impersonating users and
> vandalizing with what would come to be hundreds of sockpuppets, all while
> claiming to be the victim. He was banned:
>
>
>
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/JarlaxleArte
> mis_2
>
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Linuxbeak/Admin_stuff/Jarlaxl
> eArtemis
>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Linuxbeak/Admin_stuff/Jarlax
> leArtemis&action=edit&oldid=117471376> &action=edit&oldid=117471376
>
>
>
> He sockpuppeted and vandalized for a while after that, but apparently
> disappeared in 2006. One would have hoped maybe he grew out of his teenage
> phase and decided to get on with doing something productive instead.
>
>
>
> But sadly, the story doesn't end there. In mid-2007, he reappeared with a
> new "persona"... the move-vandal "Grawp." Unlike his ostensible
> predecessor
> Willy on Wheels, who at least had a harmless light-hearted flair to him,
> as
> "Grawp" Jarlaxle relished in specifically targeting users and sticking
> their
> personal information (usually gleaned from Daniel Brandt's website) in his
> page-move titles along with death threats and rape threats. Eventually we
> discovered that Grawp was in fact JarlaxleArtemis, and he only got more
> persistent and venomous (probably because as Jarlaxle, he was very open
> about his real-life identity and location himself.)
>
>
>
> About a week ago, having been one of Jarlaxle's recent targets, I decided
> to
> take matters into my own hand, and found his mother's contact information
> and wrote to her to inform her of the awful misdeeds her son's been up to.
> (While Jarlaxle is 19, he lives with his mother, and performs most of his
> vandalism from her Internet connection.) Instead of replying to me,
> however,
> she complained to OTRS that I was falsely accusing her son, who she
> insisted
> was JarlaxleArtemis but not Grawp. Jarlaxle then proceeded to prove her
> wrong... by vandalizing multiple wikis as "Grawp" later that night from
> the
> same IP address his mother sent her e-mail from. The ticket was handed to
> ArbCom, who replied to her with this evidence and the assurance that her
> son
> was in fact the one responsible... but received a response that she didn't
> believe them, didn't care, and was blocking all further e-mail from
> Wikimedia. (Though it's been suggested that Jarlaxle himself may have
> written that mail.) And he's continued to vandalize as recently as
> tonight.
>
>
>
> Personally, I'm utterly bamboozled. This kid is nineteen years old and in
> college; he's an adult, and he has his entire life ahead of him. Yet he
> still continues to anonymously threaten and harass people on the Internet,
> even though he's clearly stepped into illegal territory, his identity is
> known along with reams of evidence of his misdeeds connecting them to him,
> and his parent upon whom he's still dependent has been alerted. And he
> still
> soldiers on, using Mom's broadband to move pages on Wikipedia to titles "I
> will rape and murder (insert admin here)." What could possibly be running
> through his mind? And how can he be stopped?
>
>
>
> -Fran
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
In a message dated 12/12/2008 3:10:19 PM Pacific Standard Time,
george.herbert(a)gmail.com writes:
We're not here to collect 101 million grade
school essays on "Are you there, God? It's me, Margaret" in the
article on the book.>>
---------------------------------
You're being silly.
You know quite well that we have a policy V backed up with a more specific
guideline RS that would eliminate grade school reports (not published, not an
expert in their field, not an authority, not reliable, not credible.... or
whatever)
**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
favorite sites in one place. Try it now.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000…)
In a message dated 12/12/2008 1:12:17 PM Pacific Standard Time,
george.herbert(a)gmail.com writes:
Which of the
literary criticism academics, publications, etc. can be so assumed to
be accurate is more opaque to the outsider and harder to demonstrate /
validate, I think.>>
---------------------------
"Accurate" is the wrong word for in-project discussions.
As editors we can only say that a position has been presented, evidence has
been marshalled, the standard approach or theory is, and so on.
"Accurate" here seems to me to be just another name for "Truth".
Even within Physics there are competing theories all supposedly
evidence-based.
We merely have to present the competing views and move on :)
Will Johnson
**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
favorite sites in one place. Try it now.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000…)
Hey everybody, I stumbled across another wikipedia mirror with an odd
copyright notice so I thought I would ask people on here what they thought.
The site is: http://www.speedylook.com/
The content of the site appears to be a machine translation of the french
wikipedia (into english). The copyright notice at the bottom reads: "(c)
2007-2008 speedlook.com; article text available under the terms of GFDL,
from fr.wikipedia.org" Which is technically correct but seems to me
potentially misleading.
Also, I'm just curious as to why on earth they have decided to do this. Why
host an (awful) machine translation of the french site when you could just
as easily host the english wikipedia content? What gives? Does anyone have
any idea?
- Andy
In a message dated 12/12/2008 5:14:00 PM Pacific Standard Time,
fredbaud(a)fairpoint.net writes:
Definitely, as it is that obvious stuff which ought to be included in our
articles. Novel new takes on a subject, maybe not.>>
--------------------------
If you're stating that someone is preventing you, in a specific case, from
including common sense statements, or purely descriptive statements in an
article, then bring it here and I'll fix it :0
We're always allows common sense statements and descriptive statements
without the need for any source whatsoever.
"This is a picture of a cat" does not need a source.
Will Johnson
**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
favorite sites in one place. Try it now.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000…)
In a message dated 12/12/2008 3:44:39 PM Pacific Standard Time,
snowspinner(a)gmail.com writes:
Which is part of the problem. There's a lot of stuff that, in
academia, we just consider too obvious to publish.>>
------------
We already handle "Is the Sun hot?"
Our policy allows common sense statements.
You go from black-and-white to gray at some point, but the point is not "Was
Jane Austen a famous writer in her day?" but rather "Was Jane Austen *the*
most famous writer in her day?"
Everyone who has any feeling in the field can agree with the first
statement, some of them may even agree with the second.
That's what you *get* in humanities. Probabilities and approximations and
gray areas.
We are allowed to make common sense statements without the need for a source
whatsoever.
The sun is yellow-ish, lizards have tongues, and shoes eventually wear out.
It's already policy.
Will Johnson
**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
favorite sites in one place. Try it now.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000…)