Greetings,
I believe I have been wrongly blocked, but because the blocking administrator also REMOVED my complaint from the wikipedia administrators' list board, I feel the need to write here as well.
I came on tonight looking up wrestling moves and found one - the Double Underhook Facebuster - in the wrong page, as despite its sometime name (and it goes by several others) it is not a Facebuster, but rather a DDT variant.
So I made the appropriate changes on the [[Facebuster]] page and the [[DDT (professional wrestling)]] page.
I noted with some problematic nature the behavior of admins earlier to someone else who had tried to make the same factual correction; this behavior also concerns me and I mentioned it on the administrators notification page as the incidents page was locked down for some reason.
Samuel Blanning not only took it on himself to block me, but to remove my corrections from the pages, after I reported the harassment by Paulley and Naohiro19, who were threatening me as they continually tried to vandalize wikipedia and accused me of vandalism for making factual corrections.
Samuel Blanning's edits: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noti... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Facebuster&diff=99683109&o... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DDT_%28professional_wrestling%29&a...
Paulley's behavior was all abusive in nature: he continually asserted that he has some "right" to control these articles in edit summaries such as here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DDT_%28professional_wrestling%29&a...
Naohiro19 - who continually blindly removed my improvements - has since REMOVED MY UNBLOCK REQUEST. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A72.178.235.28&diff...
This is beyond abusive behavior by these admins and I request the appropriate disciplinary action be taken against them at once.
The IP address that comes up my error is 72.178.235.28, it said I should mention this.
Bob Petrovich.
Mr Petrovich,
I've had a quick look at these, and associated talk pages and block logs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/72.178.235.28 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/129.7.35.194
Given what appear to be continued and gross violations of [[WP:3RR]] under both IP addresses, abusive edit summaries and personal attacks, failure to make reasonable use of talk pages and the dispute resolution process, and what seems to be block evasion through what equates to sockpuppetry, I'm afraid I will have to decline your request at this time.
If you have a credible defense or other explanation, feel free.
Thank you for contacting unblock-en-l, -Luna
On 1/9/07, Bob Petrovich wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
Greetings,
I believe I have been wrongly blocked, but because the blocking administrator also REMOVED my complaint from the wikipedia administrators' list board, I feel the need to write here as well.
I came on tonight looking up wrestling moves and found one - the Double Underhook Facebuster - in the wrong page, as despite its sometime name (and it goes by several others) it is not a Facebuster, but rather a DDT variant.
So I made the appropriate changes on the [[Facebuster]] page and the [[DDT (professional wrestling)]] page.
I noted with some problematic nature the behavior of admins earlier to someone else who had tried to make the same factual correction; this behavior also concerns me and I mentioned it on the administrators notification page as the incidents page was locked down for some reason.
Samuel Blanning not only took it on himself to block me, but to remove my corrections from the pages, after I reported the harassment by Paulley and Naohiro19, who were threatening me as they continually tried to vandalize wikipedia and accused me of vandalism for making factual corrections.
Samuel Blanning's edits:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noti...
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Facebuster&diff=99683109&o...
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DDT_%28professional_wrestling%29&a...
Paulley's behavior was all abusive in nature: he continually asserted that he has some "right" to control these articles in edit summaries such as here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DDT_%28professional_wrestling%29&a...
Naohiro19 - who continually blindly removed my improvements - has since REMOVED MY UNBLOCK REQUEST.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A72.178.235.28&diff...
This is beyond abusive behavior by these admins and I request the appropriate disciplinary action be taken against them at once.
The IP address that comes up my error is 72.178.235.28, it said I should mention this.
Bob Petrovich. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
I have no idea who the other person is. I have barely used wikipedia before, but I know that it's supposed to be accurate and people are supposed to fix things when they see something wrong.
If that's not what wikipedia is, I guess mr wales is a liar and your "encyclopedia" is a fraud.
Bob Petrovich
On 1/9/07, Luna lunasantin@gmail.com wrote:
Mr Petrovich,
I've had a quick look at these, and associated talk pages and block logs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/72.178.235.28 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/129.7.35.194
Given what appear to be continued and gross violations of [[WP:3RR]] under both IP addresses, abusive edit summaries and personal attacks, failure to make reasonable use of talk pages and the dispute resolution process, and what seems to be block evasion through what equates to sockpuppetry, I'm afraid I will have to decline your request at this time.
If you have a credible defense or other explanation, feel free.
Thank you for contacting unblock-en-l, -Luna
On 1/9/07, Bob Petrovich wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
Greetings,
I believe I have been wrongly blocked, but because the blocking administrator also REMOVED my complaint from the wikipedia administrators' list board, I feel the need to write here as well.
I came on tonight looking up wrestling moves and found one - the Double Underhook Facebuster - in the wrong page, as despite its sometime name (and it goes by several others) it is not a Facebuster, but rather a DDT variant.
So I made the appropriate changes on the [[Facebuster]] page and the [[DDT (professional wrestling)]] page.
I noted with some problematic nature the behavior of admins earlier to someone else who had tried to make the same factual correction; this behavior also concerns me and I mentioned it on the administrators notification page as the incidents page was locked down for some reason.
Samuel Blanning not only took it on himself to block me, but to remove my corrections from the pages, after I reported the harassment by Paulley and Naohiro19, who were threatening me as they continually tried to vandalize wikipedia and accused me of vandalism for making factual corrections.
Samuel Blanning's edits:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noti...
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Facebuster&diff=99683109&o... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DDT_%28professional_wrestling%29&a...
Paulley's behavior was all abusive in nature: he continually asserted that he has some "right" to control these articles in edit summaries such as here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DDT_%28professional_wrestling%29&a...
Naohiro19 - who continually blindly removed my improvements - has since REMOVED MY UNBLOCK REQUEST. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A72.178.235.28&diff...
This is beyond abusive behavior by these admins and I request the appropriate disciplinary action be taken against them at once.
The IP address that comes up my error is 72.178.235.28, it said I should mention this.
Bob Petrovich. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 21:49:40 -0600, "Bob Petrovich" wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
I have no idea who the other person is. I have barely used wikipedia before, but I know that it's supposed to be accurate and people are supposed to fix things when they see something wrong. If that's not what wikipedia is, I guess mr wales is a liar and your "encyclopedia" is a fraud.
Over-reacting, much?
Guy (JzG)
No, sir.
They keep trying this. Paulley (a non-administrator) himself came by and removed my legally filed unblock request now.
They are obviously trying to hide the abuse of power as they try to own this article and it is amazing that you allow such behavior to continue.
I've been told wikipedia is about "assuming good faith" but all I'm seeing here is a group of jerks trying to hold ownership of an article and vandalizing wikipedia by making an article LESS accurate than it should be.
Bob Petrovich
On 1/9/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 21:49:40 -0600, "Bob Petrovich" wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
I have no idea who the other person is. I have barely used wikipedia
before,
but I know that it's supposed to be accurate and people are supposed to
fix
things when they see something wrong. If that's not what wikipedia is, I guess mr wales is a liar and your "encyclopedia" is a fraud.
Over-reacting, much?
Guy (JzG)
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
I also have no idea who the previous person it was using that IP address, because it wasn't me. I gather you get a lot of vandals but believe me, I am not the vandal here, a group of persons trying to abuse administrator power to hold ownership of an article and make wikipedia less accurate than it can be are the vandals.
Bob
On 1/9/07, Bob Petrovich wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
No, sir.
They keep trying this. Paulley (a non-administrator) himself came by and removed my legally filed unblock request now.
They are obviously trying to hide the abuse of power as they try to own this article and it is amazing that you allow such behavior to continue.
I've been told wikipedia is about "assuming good faith" but all I'm seeing here is a group of jerks trying to hold ownership of an article and vandalizing wikipedia by making an article LESS accurate than it should be.
Bob Petrovich
On 1/9/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 21:49:40 -0600, "Bob Petrovich" wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
I have no idea who the other person is. I have barely used wikipedia
before,
but I know that it's supposed to be accurate and people are supposed to
fix
things when they see something wrong. If that's not what wikipedia is, I guess mr wales is a liar and your "encyclopedia" is a fraud.
Over-reacting, much?
Guy (JzG)
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Samuel Blanning also removed my report of vandalism against Paulley: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrator_interven...
On 1/9/07, Bob Petrovich wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
I also have no idea who the previous person it was using that IP address, because it wasn't me. I gather you get a lot of vandals but believe me, I am not the vandal here, a group of persons trying to abuse administrator power to hold ownership of an article and make wikipedia less accurate than it can be are the vandals.
Bob
On 1/9/07, Bob Petrovich wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
No, sir.
They keep trying this. Paulley (a non-administrator) himself came by and removed my legally filed unblock request now.
They are obviously trying to hide the abuse of power as they try to own this article and it is amazing that you allow such behavior to continue.
I've been told wikipedia is about "assuming good faith" but all I'm seeing here is a group of jerks trying to hold ownership of an article and vandalizing wikipedia by making an article LESS accurate than it should be.
Bob Petrovich
On 1/9/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG < guy.chapman@spamcop.net> wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 21:49:40 -0600, "Bob Petrovich" wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
I have no idea who the other person is. I have barely used wikipedia
before,
but I know that it's supposed to be accurate and people are supposed
to fix
things when they see something wrong. If that's not what wikipedia is, I guess mr wales is a liar and your "encyclopedia" is a fraud.
Over-reacting, much?
Guy (JzG)
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 1/9/07, Luna lunasantin@gmail.com wrote:
Mr Petrovich,
I've had a quick look at these, and associated talk pages and block logs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/72.178.235.28 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/129.7.35.194
Given what appear to be continued and gross violations of [[WP:3RR]] under both IP addresses, abusive edit summaries and personal attacks, failure to make reasonable use of talk pages and the dispute resolution process, and what seems to be block evasion through what equates to sockpuppetry, I'm afraid I will have to decline your request at this time.
If you have a credible defense or other explanation, feel free.
Thank you for contacting unblock-en-l, -Luna
<snip>
Great, Luna, now you've gone and shown the problem with Wikipedians feeling high and mighty.
You might as well have just phrased this "sorry, you didn't genuflect deep enough for my taste, so you don't get any serious consideration."
I've looked over the same situations. In both cases, we have editors who feel they somehow have ownership of the content of pro wrestling-based articles. In one case, we have an editor who went off the deep end after being serially reverted. In the other (Mr Petrovich) we have an editor who kept a level head even as his opponent started screaming about how he started the article and therefore somehow had some right to decide what content was on it.
And as for an admin removing a valid unblock request, or an admin removing a formal protest from administrators' noticeboard? This is precisely the kind of behavior that makes good editors see wikipedia as a cabalist institution and destroys any hope they have that the administrators are behaving in good faith.
Parker
On 1/9/07, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
You might as well have just phrased this "sorry, you didn't genuflect deep enough for my taste, so you don't get any serious consideration."
Are you sure you're looking at the same contribs, Parker? Let's see some of these edit summaries:
"rv scientologist trying to whitewash his cult's crimes" "Replaced page with '{{unblock|lying scientologist ChrisO still tries to own the [Oxford Capacity Analysis] page and whitewash the crimes of his cult there.}}'" "rv dumbfuck; it's not a legitimate facebuster." "rv dumbfuck: a move which incorporates a headlock is a DDT, not a faceplant." "rv stop being a dumbfuck fanboi." "rv dumbfuck who abuses bots" "rv dumbfuck kneejerk asssucking moron who cant read the fucking change being made" "rv dumbfuck who doesn't know anything yet AGAIN."
I find it difficult to imagine any circumstance in which such behavior would ever be acceptable. You're free to disagree, but please do be aware that your doing so does not translate into me changing my mind unless you actually *convince* me to. I don't consider actions I take to be final; if other users disagree, they should be perfectly able to say so or even reverse my actions, provided they have a good explanation.
Feel free to look into this, if you like, but please do so on your own dime.
-Luna
Luna,
I've yet to see where these are connected to the user who protested to us. Perhaps that is the problem, your willingness to jump at shadows and underlying hostility to anyone who doesn't genuflect "just so" towards you.
I've reviewed the edits of *the IP address in question* and it looks like a user operating in good faith who's getting a pile-on from egomaniacs, power-mad administrators who feel they have some right to remove a filed complaint, and a particular bad seed who seems to think he has personal ownership of pro-wrestling content on Wikipedia.
Parker
On 1/9/07, Luna lunasantin@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/9/07, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
You might as well have just phrased this "sorry, you didn't genuflect
deep
enough for my taste, so you don't get any serious consideration."
Are you sure you're looking at the same contribs, Parker? Let's see some of these edit summaries:
"rv scientologist trying to whitewash his cult's crimes" "Replaced page with '{{unblock|lying scientologist ChrisO still tries to own the [Oxford Capacity Analysis] page and whitewash the crimes of his cult there.}}'" "rv dumbfuck; it's not a legitimate facebuster." "rv dumbfuck: a move which incorporates a headlock is a DDT, not a faceplant." "rv stop being a dumbfuck fanboi." "rv dumbfuck who abuses bots" "rv dumbfuck kneejerk asssucking moron who cant read the fucking change being made" "rv dumbfuck who doesn't know anything yet AGAIN."
I find it difficult to imagine any circumstance in which such behavior would ever be acceptable. You're free to disagree, but please do be aware that your doing so does not translate into me changing my mind unless you actually *convince* me to. I don't consider actions I take to be final; if other users disagree, they should be perfectly able to say so or even reverse my actions, provided they have a good explanation.
Feel free to look into this, if you like, but please do so on your own dime.
-Luna _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 1/9/07, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
I've yet to see where these are connected to the user who protested to us. Perhaps that is the problem, your willingness to jump at shadows and underlying hostility to anyone who doesn't genuflect "just so" towards you.
While I do value your opinions, I will be frank on this count: I don't trust you to be neutral.
I openly challenge you to take a dig through my postings to this mailing list, and back up your claims of my behavior and attitudes. Go for it. If you can find evidence that I've been serially abusing the few powers and positions of trust the community has seen fit to grant me, by all means, bring it to my attention. I have no qualms with specific and reasonable complaints grounded in fact.
In this case, I'm not the only user who suspects block evasion. One IP address is blocked for trolling and general disruption, a second IP address comes onto the scene and begins making the exact same reverts -- hardly a stretch of the imagination, here.
Again, as you seem to be concerned by what's happened. I have no objection if you desire to pursue this on your own.
-Luna
On 1/9/07, Luna lunasantin@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/9/07, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
I've yet to see where these are connected to the user who protested to
us.
Perhaps that is the problem, your willingness to jump at shadows and underlying hostility to anyone who doesn't genuflect "just so" towards you.
While I do value your opinions, I will be frank on this count: I don't trust you to be neutral.
I openly challenge you to take a dig through my postings to this mailing list, and back up your claims of my behavior and attitudes. Go for it. If you can find evidence that I've been serially abusing the few powers and positions of trust the community has seen fit to grant me, by all means, bring it to my attention. I have no qualms with specific and reasonable complaints grounded in fact.
In this case, I'm not the only user who suspects block evasion. One IP address is blocked for trolling and general disruption, a second IP address comes onto the scene and begins making the exact same reverts -- hardly a stretch of the imagination, here.
Again, as you seem to be concerned by what's happened. I have no objection if you desire to pursue this on your own.
-Luna
Luna,
I'll be frank with you as well: I approach things a bit different from the way you do.
It seems obvious to me that you approach things assuming the administrator is right. I approach things with an open mind and analyze the data first, then see what I can see from there. The majority of the time, I'lll admit that the administrator is right.
This, however, is plainly not one of those times. Instead, this seems to be an attempt to control the content of a page by one small group of users who happen to have an administrator or two to help them out, and it is the use of administrator powers to gain a leg up in a content dispute that I primarily have a problem with.
I have a second problem with the abuse by these administrators in removing the complainant's complaints from other pages, which is in effect trying to hide what they are doing from the community at large.
Parker
(Mostly to) Parker Peters --
The suggestion that a de-sysopping or request for arbitration ought to occur is excessive. I fail to see anything wrong with what Luna and Samuel did. Luna has, at the very least, presented evidence to support her position in a polite manner. From you, however, most of what I see amounts to /see... there's an admin cabal; I know there is/. It's one thing to disagree with someone, but it's another thing to be so dogmatic in your opinion that you believe the opposition is part of some conspiracy. Unfortunate is the fact that you've resorted to that stance.
-- Tariq Ab- Jo- Tu-
Parker Peters wrote:
On 1/9/07, Luna lunasantin@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/9/07, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
I've yet to see where these are connected to the user who protested to
us.
Perhaps that is the problem, your willingness to jump at shadows and underlying hostility to anyone who doesn't genuflect "just so" towards you.
While I do value your opinions, I will be frank on this count: I don't trust you to be neutral.
I openly challenge you to take a dig through my postings to this mailing list, and back up your claims of my behavior and attitudes. Go for it. If you can find evidence that I've been serially abusing the few powers and positions of trust the community has seen fit to grant me, by all means, bring it to my attention. I have no qualms with specific and reasonable complaints grounded in fact.
In this case, I'm not the only user who suspects block evasion. One IP address is blocked for trolling and general disruption, a second IP address comes onto the scene and begins making the exact same reverts -- hardly a stretch of the imagination, here.
Again, as you seem to be concerned by what's happened. I have no objection if you desire to pursue this on your own.
-Luna
Luna,
I'll be frank with you as well: I approach things a bit different from the way you do.
It seems obvious to me that you approach things assuming the administrator is right. I approach things with an open mind and analyze the data first, then see what I can see from there. The majority of the time, I'lll admit that the administrator is right.
This, however, is plainly not one of those times. Instead, this seems to be an attempt to control the content of a page by one small group of users who happen to have an administrator or two to help them out, and it is the use of administrator powers to gain a leg up in a content dispute that I primarily have a problem with.
I have a second problem with the abuse by these administrators in removing the complainant's complaints from other pages, which is in effect trying to hide what they are doing from the community at large.
Parker _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
There's nothing wrong with what Luna did, save that I think she's using things unrelated to a user to justify inaction in this case.
Samuel on the other hand? Let's see: removal of a complaint from Admins Noticeboard, deliberate reversion in a case where he was the blocker, and what appears to be a highly bad-faith block.
Parker
On 1/9/07, Tariq Ab- Jo- Tu- tariqabjotu@gmail.com wrote:
(Mostly to) Parker Peters --
The suggestion that a de-sysopping or request for arbitration ought to occur is excessive. I fail to see anything wrong with what Luna and Samuel did. Luna has, at the very least, presented evidence to support her position in a polite manner. From you, however, most of what I see amounts to /see... there's an admin cabal; I know there is/. It's one thing to disagree with someone, but it's another thing to be so dogmatic in your opinion that you believe the opposition is part of some conspiracy. Unfortunate is the fact that you've resorted to that stance.
-- Tariq Ab- Jo- Tu-
Parker Peters wrote:
On 1/9/07, Luna lunasantin@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/9/07, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
I've yet to see where these are connected to the user who protested to
us.
Perhaps that is the problem, your willingness to jump at shadows and underlying hostility to anyone who doesn't genuflect "just so" towards you.
While I do value your opinions, I will be frank on this count: I don't trust you to be neutral.
I openly challenge you to take a dig through my postings to this
mailing
list, and back up your claims of my behavior and attitudes. Go for it.
If
you can find evidence that I've been serially abusing the few powers
and
positions of trust the community has seen fit to grant me, by all
means,
bring it to my attention. I have no qualms with specific and reasonable complaints grounded in fact.
In this case, I'm not the only user who suspects block evasion. One IP address is blocked for trolling and general disruption, a second IP address comes onto the scene and begins making the exact same reverts -- hardly
a
stretch of the imagination, here.
Again, as you seem to be concerned by what's happened. I have no
objection
if you desire to pursue this on your own.
-Luna
Luna,
I'll be frank with you as well: I approach things a bit different from
the
way you do.
It seems obvious to me that you approach things assuming the
administrator
is right. I approach things with an open mind and analyze the data
first,
then see what I can see from there. The majority of the time, I'lll
admit
that the administrator is right.
This, however, is plainly not one of those times. Instead, this seems to
be
an attempt to control the content of a page by one small group of users
who
happen to have an administrator or two to help them out, and it is the
use
of administrator powers to gain a leg up in a content dispute that I primarily have a problem with.
I have a second problem with the abuse by these administrators in
removing
the complainant's complaints from other pages, which is in effect trying
to
hide what they are doing from the community at large.
Parker _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Yours is an attitude which does a disservice to Wikipedia and which is why I myself no longer edit but do follow this list for these sorts of incidient so I can document them.
You simply neglect the valid "FACT" and wrap it up in formal nonsense. It's completely and highly irresponsible IE: Someone gets killed by a person you have in hand, a relative of that person screams and complains and generally acts stupid. Instead of looking at the FACTS you look at the the relative and simply say. I can't do anything for you, you're acting like an asshole. This may be fine in social situations where one is doing the other a favor but when it involves things like the truth and facts and/or general scientific method it has no place.
If it's a fact. IT IS A FACT! How both of you can argue over the other stuff and negate the facts is amazing!!
The real discussion should be is what the editor saying FACT? If not then he's a vandal, if so, The Administrators have abused their power, as this has happened to me in relation to the Lou Dobbs Article I am extremely biased but so far and doing this research over the last couple of months. Wikipedia Administrators are the problem.
Christopher Warner
On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 20:42 -0800, Luna wrote:
On 1/9/07, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
I've yet to see where these are connected to the user who protested to us. Perhaps that is the problem, your willingness to jump at shadows and underlying hostility to anyone who doesn't genuflect "just so" towards you.
While I do value your opinions, I will be frank on this count: I don't trust you to be neutral.
I openly challenge you to take a dig through my postings to this mailing list, and back up your claims of my behavior and attitudes. Go for it. If you can find evidence that I've been serially abusing the few powers and positions of trust the community has seen fit to grant me, by all means, bring it to my attention. I have no qualms with specific and reasonable complaints grounded in fact.
In this case, I'm not the only user who suspects block evasion. One IP address is blocked for trolling and general disruption, a second IP address comes onto the scene and begins making the exact same reverts -- hardly a stretch of the imagination, here.
Again, as you seem to be concerned by what's happened. I have no objection if you desire to pursue this on your own.
-Luna _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 1/9/07, Bob Petrovich wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
Greetings,
I believe I have been wrongly blocked, but because the blocking administrator also REMOVED my complaint from the wikipedia administrators' list board, I feel the need to write here as well.
I came on tonight looking up wrestling moves and found one - the Double Underhook Facebuster - in the wrong page, as despite its sometime name (and it goes by several others) it is not a Facebuster, but rather a DDT variant.
So I made the appropriate changes on the [[Facebuster]] page and the [[DDT (professional wrestling)]] page.
I noted with some problematic nature the behavior of admins earlier to someone else who had tried to make the same factual correction; this behavior also concerns me and I mentioned it on the administrators notification page as the incidents page was locked down for some reason.
Samuel Blanning not only took it on himself to block me, but to remove my corrections from the pages, after I reported the harassment by Paulley and Naohiro19, who were threatening me as they continually tried to vandalize wikipedia and accused me of vandalism for making factual corrections.
Samuel Blanning's edits:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noti...
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Facebuster&diff=99683109&o...
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DDT_%28professional_wrestling%29&a...
Paulley's behavior was all abusive in nature: he continually asserted that he has some "right" to control these articles in edit summaries such as here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DDT_%28professional_wrestling%29&a...
Naohiro19 - who continually blindly removed my improvements - has since REMOVED MY UNBLOCK REQUEST.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A72.178.235.28&diff...
This is beyond abusive behavior by these admins and I request the appropriate disciplinary action be taken against them at once.
The IP address that comes up my error is 72.178.235.28, it said I should mention this.
Bob Petrovich. _______________________________________________
This looks a lot like the sort of institutional problems I was talking about earlier.
Parker
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 20:58:32 -0600, "Bob Petrovich" wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
(some stuff)
This is discussed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Inciden...
Guy (JzG)
Paulley is lying, I am NOT that person.
Bob
On 1/9/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 20:58:32 -0600, "Bob Petrovich" wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
(some stuff)
This is discussed here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Inciden...
Guy (JzG)
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
User Ryulong has now removed my legally filed unblock request AGAIN and his patsy Khoikoi has locked the page down.
You know what? This proves you are full of it, you aren't being in good faith at all.
Bob
On 1/9/07, Bob Petrovich wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
Paulley is lying, I am NOT that person.
Bob
On 1/9/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman@spamcop.net > wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 20:58:32 -0600, "Bob Petrovich" < wrestfan01@gmail.com> wrote:
(some stuff)
This is discussed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Inciden...
Guy (JzG)
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Sigh....
This is just pathetic. I mean, seriously. Do we have nothing better to do than pile onto and abuse good-faith editors, people?
I'm serious here. I've forwarded this to Jimbo directly, this is precisely the sort of admin behavior that made me leave wikipedia. This is a textbook case for a desysopping of Samuel Blanning and perhaps others, or at least it would be if the cult of adminship and some very cabalish behavior weren't alive and well.
Parker
On 1/9/07, Bob Petrovich wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
User Ryulong has now removed my legally filed unblock request AGAIN and his patsy Khoikoi has locked the page down.
You know what? This proves you are full of it, you aren't being in good faith at all.
Bob
On 1/9/07, Bob Petrovich wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
Paulley is lying, I am NOT that person.
Bob
On 1/9/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman@spamcop.net > wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 20:58:32 -0600, "Bob Petrovich" < wrestfan01@gmail.com> wrote:
(some stuff)
This is discussed here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Inciden...
Guy (JzG)
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Naohiro has now left another threat on my discussion page.
You really are a bunch of crazy egomaniacs aren't you?
Bob
On 1/9/07, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
Sigh....
This is just pathetic. I mean, seriously. Do we have nothing better to do than pile onto and abuse good-faith editors, people?
I'm serious here. I've forwarded this to Jimbo directly, this is precisely the sort of admin behavior that made me leave wikipedia. This is a textbook case for a desysopping of Samuel Blanning and perhaps others, or at least it would be if the cult of adminship and some very cabalish behavior weren't alive and well.
Parker
On 1/9/07, Bob Petrovich wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
User Ryulong has now removed my legally filed unblock request AGAIN and his patsy Khoikoi has locked the page down.
You know what? This proves you are full of it, you aren't being in good faith at all.
Bob
On 1/9/07, Bob Petrovich wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
Paulley is lying, I am NOT that person.
Bob
On 1/9/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG < guy.chapman@spamcop.net > wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 20:58:32 -0600, "Bob Petrovich" < wrestfan01@gmail.com> wrote:
(some stuff)
This is discussed here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Inciden...
Guy (JzG)
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Bob, I'm going to be as direct as possible with you.
CALM DOWN.
You're not helping your situation. Calling names doesn't help.
Your block will probably be up in a few days, and at that time, I advise you to file a formal arbitration committee complaint. I'll even assist you with links at that time.
I'm signing off. This isn't worth any more aggravation for any of us right now, and everyone is too hotheaded as it is.
Parker
On 1/9/07, Bob Petrovichwrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
Naohiro has now left another threat on my discussion page.
You really are a bunch of crazy egomaniacs aren't you?
Bob
On 1/9/07, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
Sigh....
This is just pathetic. I mean, seriously. Do we have nothing better to do than pile onto and abuse good-faith editors, people?
I'm serious here. I've forwarded this to Jimbo directly, this is precisely the sort of admin behavior that made me leave wikipedia. This is a textbook case for a desysopping of Samuel Blanning and perhaps others, or at least it would be if the cult of adminship and some very cabalish behavior weren't alive and well.
Parker
On 1/9/07, Bob Petrovich < wrestfan01@gmail.com> wrote:
User Ryulong has now removed my legally filed unblock request AGAIN and his patsy Khoikoi has locked the page down.
You know what? This proves you are full of it, you aren't being in good faith at all.
Bob
On 1/9/07, Bob Petrovich wrestfan01@gmail.com wrote:
Paulley is lying, I am NOT that person.
Bob
On 1/9/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG < guy.chapman@spamcop.net > wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 20:58:32 -0600, "Bob Petrovich" < wrestfan01@gmail.com> wrote:
(some stuff)
This is discussed here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Inciden...
Guy (JzG)
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 1/10/07, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
Naohiro has now left another threat on my discussion page.
You really are a bunch of crazy egomaniacs aren't you?
Bob
Hello folks. I see here that Parker Peters has sent an email to the list, but it is written in the character of Bob, and signed "Bob" at the end. Parker Peters then replied to it, in character as Parker Peters, and the quoting was changed to make it appear as if the e-mail address for Bob had sent it.
Now, a cynical person would say this constitutes clear evidence that both email addresses are being operated by the same person, and they messed up and lost track of who they were logged in as at the time. In fact, not just cynical people. Even naive people would think this.
End the charade please, someone. It's unbecoming to argue with yourself on a mailing list.
On 10/01/07, Abigail Brady morwen@evilmagic.org wrote:
Hello folks. I see here that Parker Peters has sent an email to the list, but it is written in the character of Bob, and signed "Bob" at the end. Parker Peters then replied to it, in character as Parker Peters, and the quoting was changed to make it appear as if the e-mail address for Bob had sent it. Now, a cynical person would say this constitutes clear evidence that both email addresses are being operated by the same person, and they messed up and lost track of who they were logged in as at the time. In fact, not just cynical people. Even naive people would think this. End the charade please, someone. It's unbecoming to argue with yourself on a mailing list.
But it was smart enough to fool him; surely you can't expect him to believe it's not smart enough to fool us too.
I am not going to block the addresses (as yet), but I am going to hereby point and laugh.
- d.
On 1/10/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/01/07, Abigail Brady morwen@evilmagic.org wrote:
Hello folks. I see here that Parker Peters has sent an email to the list, but it is written in the character of Bob, and signed "Bob" at the end. Parker Peters then replied to it, in character as Parker Peters, and the quoting was changed to make it appear as if the e-mail address for Bob had sent it. Now, a cynical person would say this constitutes clear evidence that both email addresses are being operated by the same person, and they messed up and lost track of who they were logged in as at the time. In fact, not just cynical people. Even naive people would think this. End the charade please, someone. It's unbecoming to argue with yourself on a mailing list.
But it was smart enough to fool him; surely you can't expect him to believe it's not smart enough to fool us too.
I am not going to block the addresses (as yet), but I am going to hereby point and laugh.
Well, I guess that answers the question of who he is...
I will not laugh, as it would be piling on, but a good pointing-at is called for.
"You have to be this tall to storm the castle."
Hmm, I seem to remember threads from last month where Parker claims to be an admin and even wrote to Jimbo to get "trolling" against him stopped...
On 10/01/07, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/10/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/01/07, Abigail Brady morwen@evilmagic.org wrote:
Hello folks. I see here that Parker Peters has sent an email to the list, but it is written in the character of Bob, and signed "Bob" at the end. Parker Peters then replied to it, in character as Parker Peters, and the quoting was changed to make it appear as if the e-mail address for Bob had sent it. Now, a cynical person would say this constitutes clear evidence that both email addresses are being operated by the same person, and they messed up and lost track of who they were logged in as at the time. In fact, not just cynical people. Even naive people would think this. End the charade please, someone. It's unbecoming to argue with yourself on a mailing list.
But it was smart enough to fool him; surely you can't expect him to believe it's not smart enough to fool us too.
I am not going to block the addresses (as yet), but I am going to hereby point and laugh.
Well, I guess that answers the question of who he is...
I will not laugh, as it would be piling on, but a good pointing-at is called for.
"You have to be this tall to storm the castle."
-- -george william herbert george.herbert@gmail.com
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
We're throwing around some really nasty words here!
Let this be a moment of reconciliation.
On 1/10/07, NSLE (Wikipedia) nsle.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm, I seem to remember threads from last month where Parker claims to be an admin and even wrote to Jimbo to get "trolling" against him stopped...
On 10/01/07, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/10/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/01/07, Abigail Brady morwen@evilmagic.org wrote:
Hello folks. I see here that Parker Peters has sent an email to the list, but it is written in the character of Bob, and signed "Bob" at the end. Parker Peters then replied to it, in character as Parker Peters, and the quoting was changed to make it appear as if the
address for Bob had sent it. Now, a cynical person would say this constitutes clear evidence that both email addresses are being operated by the same person, and they messed up and lost track of who they were logged in as at the time. In fact, not just cynical people. Even naive people would think
this.
End the charade please, someone. It's unbecoming to argue with yourself on a mailing list.
But it was smart enough to fool him; surely you can't expect him to believe it's not smart enough to fool us too.
I am not going to block the addresses (as yet), but I am going to hereby point and laugh.
Well, I guess that answers the question of who he is...
I will not laugh, as it would be piling on, but a good pointing-at is called for.
"You have to be this tall to storm the castle."
-- -george william herbert george.herbert@gmail.com
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 11:18:22 +0000, "David Gerard" dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
I am not going to block the addresses (as yet), but I am going to hereby point and laugh.
Oh please block the addresses. If we needed any further evidence that "Parker Peters" is trolling us, that surely provided it.
Guy (JzG)
Case in point, this is getting silly. I'm presuming the "d" is David Gerard then?
As I noted in my last email, I've sent an error report in to Google about this.
Parker
On 1/10/07, Abigail Brady morwen@evilmagic.org wrote:
On 10/01/07, Abigail Brady morwen@evilmagic.org wrote:
Hello folks. I see here that Parker Peters has sent an email to the list, but it is written in the character of Bob, and signed "Bob" at the end. Parker Peters then replied to it, in character as Parker Peters, and the quoting was changed to make it appear as if the e-mail address for Bob had sent it. Now, a cynical person would say this constitutes clear evidence that both email addresses are being operated by the same person, and they messed up and lost track of who they were logged in as at the time. In fact, not just cynical people. Even naive people would think this. End the charade please, someone. It's unbecoming to argue with yourself on a mailing list.
But it was smart enough to fool him; surely you can't expect him to believe it's not smart enough to fool us too.
I am not going to block the addresses (as yet), but I am going to hereby point and laugh.
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Yes... I was wondering about that...
Abigail Brady wrote:
On 1/10/07, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
Naohiro has now left another threat on my discussion page.
You really are a bunch of crazy egomaniacs aren't you?
Bob
Hello folks. I see here that Parker Peters has sent an email to the list, but it is written in the character of Bob, and signed "Bob" at the end. Parker Peters then replied to it, in character as Parker Peters, and the quoting was changed to make it appear as if the e-mail address for Bob had sent it.
Now, a cynical person would say this constitutes clear evidence that both email addresses are being operated by the same person, and they messed up and lost track of who they were logged in as at the time. In fact, not just cynical people. Even naive people would think this.
End the charade please, someone. It's unbecoming to argue with yourself on a mailing list.
Google appears to be "having problems." I've filed a report with them.
This is why Gmail is still a beta product, apparently.
Parker
On 1/10/07, James Hare messedrocker@gmail.com wrote:
Yes... I was wondering about that...
Abigail Brady wrote:
On 1/10/07, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
Naohiro has now left another threat on my discussion page.
You really are a bunch of crazy egomaniacs aren't you?
Bob
Hello folks. I see here that Parker Peters has sent an email to the list, but it is written in the character of Bob, and signed "Bob" at the end. Parker Peters then replied to it, in character as Parker Peters, and the quoting was changed to make it appear as if the e-mail address for Bob had sent it.
Now, a cynical person would say this constitutes clear evidence that both email addresses are being operated by the same person, and they messed up and lost track of who they were logged in as at the time. In fact, not just cynical people. Even naive people would think this.
End the charade please, someone. It's unbecoming to argue with yourself on a mailing list.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
The "Parker Peters" and "Bob Petrovich" addresses have been placed on moderation. Please don't continue adding to this thread.
- d.
Are you really Abi, or are you David?
I'm filing an error report with Gmail now, don't worry. I seem to have a lot of these this morning. I guess this is why gmail is still "beta."
Parker
On 1/10/07, David Gerarddgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/10/07, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
Naohiro has now left another threat on my discussion page.
You really are a bunch of crazy egomaniacs aren't you?
Bob
Hello folks. I see here that Parker Peters has sent an email to the list, but it is written in the character of Bob, and signed "Bob" at the end. Parker Peters then replied to it, in character as Parker Peters, and the quoting was changed to make it appear as if the e-mail address for Bob had sent it.
Now, a cynical person would say this constitutes clear evidence that both email addresses are being operated by the same person, and they messed up and lost track of who they were logged in as at the time. In fact, not just cynical people. Even naive people would think this.
End the charade please, someone. It's unbecoming to argue with yourself on a mailing list.
-- Abi
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 1/10/07, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
Are you really Abi, or are you David?
I'm filing an error report with Gmail now, don't worry. I seem to have a lot of these this morning. I guess this is why gmail is still "beta."
Parker
Liar, liar, pants on fire.
Someone claiming to be "Parker Peters" wrote:
Are you really Abi, or are you David?
I'm filing an error report with Gmail now, don't worry. I seem to have a lot of these this morning. I guess this is why gmail is still "beta."
On 1/10/07, Abigail Brady^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HDavid Gerard wrote:
...
I don't know whether to laugh or cry. This is so pathetic it's almost funny.
And to think I almost fell for you guys...
On 1/10/07, Steve Summit scs@eskimo.com wrote:
Someone claiming to be "Parker Peters" wrote:
Are you really Abi, or are you David?
I'm filing an error report with Gmail now, don't worry. I seem to have a lot of these this morning. I guess this is why gmail is still "beta."
On 1/10/07, Abigail Brady^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HDavid Gerard wrote:
...
I don't know whether to laugh or cry. This is so pathetic it's almost funny.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
No need to kick them while they're down.
On 1/10/07, Ilmari Karonen nospam@vyznev.net wrote:
Parker Peters^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HEmperor Joshua A. Norton wrote:
Are you really Abi, or are you David?
Parker
Hee hee. :-)
-- Ilmari Karonen
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
James Hare stated for the record:
No need to kick them while they're down.
It's okay: we're laughing at him, not with him.
- -- Sean Barrett | Power corrupts. Absolute power is really cool. sean@epoptic.com |
On 1/10/07, Sean Barrett sean@epoptic.com wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
James Hare stated for the record:
No need to kick them while they're down.
It's okay: we're laughing at him, not with him.
This is both funny and dissapointing: I think we could use some strongly disagreeing, but fundamentally honest and non-trolling, critics to keep us all honest.
I was hoping that Parker might turn out to be one, but alas...
George Herbert wrote:
On 1/10/07, Sean Barrett sean@epoptic.com wrote:
It's okay: we're laughing at him, not with him.
This is both funny and dissapointing: I think we could use some strongly disagreeing, but fundamentally honest and non-trolling, critics to keep us all honest.
I was hoping that Parker might turn out to be one, but alas...
Actually, I'm rather disappointed too. I'd just about started to develop some grudging respect for the guy, and then, poof, he goes and blows it. Sigh...