On 11/16/05, Keith Old keithold@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, I am very concerned about the attacks on blogs on Wikipedia given that the blogs under attack are clearly notable having received coverage in the mainstream media and with high levels
I am working on updating WP:WEB to cover blogs. Hopefully, I will have draft criteria in place. Like it or not, blogs are becoming increasingly important in the media and we should ensure that we have decent coverage. If it is inspired by a two-bit organisation like GNAA that makes it even worse.
I would welcome your input on the criteria and the information about the specific articles they have nominated. Members of the push would also be welcome.
Their hit list is directly available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Timecop/The_war_on_blogs. Redirects also exist at WP:BLOGS and WP:BUTFUQ to give this the appearance of a Wikipedia-sanctioned project.
Besides Timecop himself, the other sockpuppets I've identified so far are: Femmina, JacksonBrown, impi.za, incognito, skrewler, Adamn, TedBerg, Depakote, G0sp-hell and anon IPs 65.34.232.136, 86.2.56.178, and 70.240.91.19. Every one of these has virtually no edit history whatsoever (or a history consisting of a handful edits at most) prior to the launch of the blogwar. Some of their user pages even link directly back to Timecop's blogwar master page; others actually try to reassure us that they're not sockpuppets (which I might find touching, except for the fact that their edit history is entirely consistent with the sockpuppet thing.) This doesn't necessarily mean there aren't others as well; these are just who I've identified so far.
There *are* some cases where I would personally also vote to delete if there were actually a legitimate process going on, so I'm *not* just targeting people who disagree with me...but as things currently stand, casting a vote even when I happen to agree with the trolls would simply be feeding them.
Craig