The current listing at VfD of [[Cayley-Newbirth operation matrix]] has flushed out User:ExplorerCDT, who at the very least knew this was a hoax page, and posted comments at VfD designed to obfuscate and mislead.
User:ExplorerCDT is apparently otherwise in good standing as a Wikipedian. How to proceed in such a case?
Context is that there have been a number of attempts to place hoax pages in mathematics in the English Wikipedia. This example is evidently written with at least a well-informed graduate student knowledge (as with the recent vandalism attack by [[User:Slim Jim]], with plausibe disinformative tweaking). The page was been around for eight months, since it has the look-and-feel of a piece of obscure, dull abstract mathematics quite accurately.
For myself I would like to see User:ExplorerCDT banned, for bad faith editing.
Charles
That's very peculiar because ExplorerCDT encourages deleting things he sees as insignificant, to the point of encouraging "statement VfDs" (ie Jean-Luc Picard, nominated by another user at his suggestion). He's also made and many, many deletion replies in VfDs like [[Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Anya Schiffrin]]. Yet this anticruft crusader recently nominated [[Festivus]] for FAC. All of this is completely baffling to me.
But we can't ban someone for making "bad votes", even if they _are_ misleading editors, right?
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 09:31:09 -0000, Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
The current listing at VfD of [[Cayley-Newbirth operation matrix]] has flushed out User:ExplorerCDT, who at the very least knew this was a hoax page, and posted comments at VfD designed to obfuscate and mislead.
User:ExplorerCDT is apparently otherwise in good standing as a Wikipedian. How to proceed in such a case?
Context is that there have been a number of attempts to place hoax pages in mathematics in the English Wikipedia. This example is evidently written with at least a well-informed graduate student knowledge (as with the recent vandalism attack by [[User:Slim Jim]], with plausibe disinformative tweaking). The page was been around for eight months, since it has the look-and-feel of a piece of obscure, dull abstract mathematics quite accurately.
For myself I would like to see User:ExplorerCDT banned, for bad faith editing.
Charles
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Cool Hand Luke wrote
All of this is completely baffling to me.
But we can't ban someone for making "bad votes", even if they _are_ misleading editors, right?
I could speculate on the motivation of someone who had a beef about 'soft' content, and also wished to make a point about the lack of rigour in attending to the validity of supposed 'hard' content.
Sticking to the facts, defending hoax material knowingly is a pretty serious charge. It is also an attack on the Assume Good Faith principle, if the motivation is to create more of a climate of suspicion. I say that this is one of the things the community in no way needs.
Charles
People have been banned before for breaking rules as a way of demonstrating that they need to be changed rather than discussing change directly. Most recently VeryVerily.
As to proceeding, if the charge is true, please get together the material that would demonstrate that to laypeople and follow the dispute resolution procedure (although it might be accepted, with strong proof, as is, for arbitration).
Fred
From: Cool Hand Luke failure.to.communicate@gmail.com Reply-To: Cool Hand Luke failure.to.communicate@gmail.com, English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 03:20:46 -0700 To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Complicity in hoaxing - how to proceed?
That's very peculiar because ExplorerCDT encourages deleting things he sees as insignificant, to the point of encouraging "statement VfDs" (ie Jean-Luc Picard, nominated by another user at his suggestion). He's also made and many, many deletion replies in VfDs like [[Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Anya Schiffrin]]. Yet this anticruft crusader recently nominated [[Festivus]] for FAC. All of this is completely baffling to me.
But we can't ban someone for making "bad votes", even if they _are_ misleading editors, right?
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 09:31:09 -0000, Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
The current listing at VfD of [[Cayley-Newbirth operation matrix]] has flushed out User:ExplorerCDT, who at the very least knew this was a hoax page, and posted comments at VfD designed to obfuscate and mislead.
User:ExplorerCDT is apparently otherwise in good standing as a Wikipedian. How to proceed in such a case?
Context is that there have been a number of attempts to place hoax pages in mathematics in the English Wikipedia. This example is evidently written with at least a well-informed graduate student knowledge (as with the recent vandalism attack by [[User:Slim Jim]], with plausibe disinformative tweaking). The page was been around for eight months, since it has the look-and-feel of a piece of obscure, dull abstract mathematics quite accurately.
For myself I would like to see User:ExplorerCDT banned, for bad faith editing.
Charles
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Fred Bauder wrote
As to proceeding, if the charge is true, please get together the material that would demonstrate that to laypeople and follow the dispute resolution procedure (although it might be accepted, with strong proof, as is, for arbitration).
The hoax is 'admitted' (i.e. the user under discussion has now on the VfD page and article talk said it is a hoax, having previously strenuously denied that with cod references to a large standard text). I am willing to collate what I know about this; but it being Christmas Eve I don't have that much time to commit to that.
Charles
It is by no means a necessary conclusion that the user ought to be banned. The explanation should be interesting.
Fred
From: "Charles Matthews" charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 11:58:15 -0000 To: "English Wikipedia" wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Complicity in hoaxing - how to proceed?
Fred Bauder wrote
As to proceeding, if the charge is true, please get together the material that would demonstrate that to laypeople and follow the dispute resolution procedure (although it might be accepted, with strong proof, as is, for arbitration).
The hoax is 'admitted' (i.e. the user under discussion has now on the VfD page and article talk said it is a hoax, having previously strenuously denied that with cod references to a large standard text). I am willing to collate what I know about this; but it being Christmas Eve I don't have that much time to commit to that.
Charles
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred Bauder" fredbaud@ctelco.net To: "English Wikipedia" wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Sent: Friday, December 24, 2004 12:15 PM Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Complicity in hoaxing - how to proceed?
It is by no means a necessary conclusion that the user ought to be banned. The explanation should be interesting.
Fred
Try this section from [[User:ExplorerCDT]]:
Warnings 1.. I like to be very bold in editing pages, even to the point of pissing people off. 2.. I like to recommend articles for VfD, with my discerning eye. 3.. It might take me a month to finish a big article or a major edit, given I usually do this while working on 57 other projects. 4.. I have a hatred for the Wikipedia:Naming conventions policy dictating that the second and subsequent words in a title should be lowercase, uncapitalized. 5.. I hate civility. No use sugar-coating the hard truth or being nice to stupid people...no matter what Wikipedia policy pleads
Conveys 'attitude'?
Anyway, I have started things moving on the user talk page, with some requests.
Charles