Now I was reading the mailing list a while ago, and I thought of a memorable experience from when I was editing Wikipedia as [[User:Ziggy_Sawdust]]. On the Reference Desk, some of you may recall a character called the Avril Lavigne troll. He used about 10 IPs, an army of redlinked accounts, and asked a bunch of ridiculous questions, mostly pertaining to Avril Lavigne, but the unifying characteristic was that none of them had any place on the Reference Desk, let alone Wikipedia. He did do some vandalism to the Reference Desk header too, but that wasn't a primary part of his actions. Now what I did is I set up a subpage on my userspace. He and I agreed that he could ask his redonkulous questions there, I (or whoever else wanted to) could answer them, and he would leave the Reference Desk alone. He did. Now this isn't going to be representative of all "trolls", of course, but for some of them, yes. What have we learned? That sometimes, if someone wants attention, we should make a small compromise and give them what they want instead of flat-out denying it, which would make them seek it harder.
On 10/14/08, Flameviper Velifang theflameysnake@yahoo.com wrote:
On the Reference Desk, some of you may recall a character called the Avril Lavigne troll.
Hey... is this the same idiot who would install "Twinkle" and make a lot of edits like this:
(removing backlinks to [[July 4]] because "AVRIL LAVIGNE ROKZ MY SOCKZ!"; using TW)
In retrospect this is as good a reason as the reason the MOS guys are using now.
Aside from that, yes, the reference desk is a breeding ground for trolls, maybe even by design. Village pump less so.
—C.W.