(sorry if I duplicate this post)
Sometimes I wonder though when I find an editor who seems just like another editor. Funny, how these two appear to have almost cloned each other's users pages.
See, *this* is what I call a sock-puppet:
A quote from User:Nesbit/User:Sue Rangell
Why I do Wikipedia
Wikipedia is an excellent example of how knowledge can be socially constructed. The editing and discussion tools constitute a collaborative knowledge building environment that stands as an alternative model to threaded asynchronous conferences, collaborative annotation systems, blogs, and software development systems.
They also are both have a discrete number (less than twelve) of right justified, paragraph spaced rather than continually stacked, user boxes identifying both as native speakers of English, left handed, skeptical of MBTL (whatever that is), users of Mozilla firefox browsers, they both program in Pascal and HTML, and they both may, one day, become self-proclaimed professional procastinators.
As for professional interests, they both have the exact same list:
My professional interests on Wikipedia include:
Cognitive psychology
Concept mapping
Knowledge representation
…
Music Synthesizers
Jazz
Computer programming
*Interesting enough, in light of the Essjay scandal, they both claim to be professors or educators at universities*, one a woman in the department of education at DeMoines University (sic), the other a man at a university in Canada. Only the man links to his faculty page, whereas I assume the spelling might be an issue with the woman's link--is there really a DeMoines University?
I've run across a handful of pairs like this on Wikipedia, both active editors, just like these two--Nesbit just editing a few days ago, Sue posting a poorly written snowball of an article to FAC today. They seem more like socks, to me, than the random rantors that pop up on this list every once in a while. They come up in unusual situations, like GA nominations, FAC. Sue Rangell's nomination for FAC was such a poorly written article, ridiculously made into a series of lists, that I wondered what else she had done. Not much considering she only made her user page and first edit a week ago, but has already been giving away barnstars like crazy and getting awards, too.
I suppose there is some obvious explanation for this, so I'll just ask User:Nesbit if User:Sue Rangell is his sock puppet. But like last time I asked this, I just got a denial, although the editor in question did stop supporting him/herself on GA nominations.
Am I missing something? I suppose if the socks are not misbehaving it's not an issue, so maybe that's why administrators are not commenting upon these.
But check user? Similar whiney rants on this list? It's not like whining requires finese and originality, especially when angry.
KP
Actually, I was more wondering if Sue was a sock of Chahax, as their sudden crossing of paths seemed rather curious too.
Risker
On 3/18/07, K P kpbotany@gmail.com wrote:
(sorry if I duplicate this post)
Sometimes I wonder though when I find an editor who seems just like another editor. Funny, how these two appear to have almost cloned each other's users pages.
See, *this* is what I call a sock-puppet:
A quote from User:Nesbit/User:Sue Rangell
Why I do Wikipedia
Wikipedia is an excellent example of how knowledge can be socially constructed. The editing and discussion tools constitute a collaborative knowledge building environment that stands as an alternative model to threaded asynchronous conferences, collaborative annotation systems, blogs, and software development systems.
They also are both have a discrete number (less than twelve) of right justified, paragraph spaced rather than continually stacked, user boxes identifying both as native speakers of English, left handed, skeptical of MBTL (whatever that is), users of Mozilla firefox browsers, they both program in Pascal and HTML, and they both may, one day, become self-proclaimed professional procastinators.
As for professional interests, they both have the exact same list:
My professional interests on Wikipedia include:
Cognitive psychology
Concept mapping
Knowledge representation
…
Music Synthesizers
Jazz
Computer programming
*Interesting enough, in light of the Essjay scandal, they both claim to be professors or educators at universities*, one a woman in the department of education at DeMoines University (sic), the other a man at a university in Canada. Only the man links to his faculty page, whereas I assume the spelling might be an issue with the woman's link--is there really a DeMoines University?
I've run across a handful of pairs like this on Wikipedia, both active editors, just like these two--Nesbit just editing a few days ago, Sue posting a poorly written snowball of an article to FAC today. They seem more like socks, to me, than the random rantors that pop up on this list every once in a while. They come up in unusual situations, like GA nominations, FAC. Sue Rangell's nomination for FAC was such a poorly written article, ridiculously made into a series of lists, that I wondered what else she had done. Not much considering she only made her user page and first edit a week ago, but has already been giving away barnstars like crazy and getting awards, too.
I suppose there is some obvious explanation for this, so I'll just ask User:Nesbit if User:Sue Rangell is his sock puppet. But like last time I asked this, I just got a denial, although the editor in question did stop supporting him/herself on GA nominations.
Am I missing something? I suppose if the socks are not misbehaving it's not an issue, so maybe that's why administrators are not commenting upon these.
But check user? Similar whiney rants on this list? It's not like whining requires finese and originality, especially when angry.
KP _______________________________________________ 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'm guessing there's more than one or two socks in this loop, Sue being simply the latest. Another account which she interacts with frequently had an interesting first edit, she edited her monobook as the first edit of her newly opened account. Going all these interesting places on Wikipedia is one thing, but opening an account and editing your monobook as your first edit, that''s really special.
The Sue sock has good taste as she's now copying my user page because, she says, it is so cool--which might be flattering under other circumstances.
KP
On 3/18/07, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
Actually, I was more wondering if Sue was a sock of Chahax, as their sudden crossing of paths seemed rather curious too.
Risker
On 3/18/07, K P kpbotany@gmail.com wrote:
(sorry if I duplicate this post)
Sometimes I wonder though when I find an editor who seems just like another editor. Funny, how these two appear to have almost cloned each other's users pages.
See, *this* is what I call a sock-puppet:
A quote from User:Nesbit/User:Sue Rangell
Why I do Wikipedia
Wikipedia is an excellent example of how knowledge can be socially constructed. The editing and discussion tools constitute a collaborative
knowledge building environment that stands as an alternative model to threaded asynchronous conferences, collaborative annotation systems, blogs, and software development systems.
They also are both have a discrete number (less than twelve) of right justified, paragraph spaced rather than continually stacked, user boxes identifying both as native speakers of English, left handed, skeptical
of
MBTL (whatever that is), users of Mozilla firefox browsers, they both program in Pascal and HTML, and they both may, one day, become self-proclaimed professional procastinators.
As for professional interests, they both have the exact same list:
My professional interests on Wikipedia include:
Cognitive psychology
Concept mapping
Knowledge representation
…
Music Synthesizers
Jazz
Computer programming
*Interesting enough, in light of the Essjay scandal, they both claim to
be
professors or educators at universities*, one a woman in the department
of
education at DeMoines University (sic), the other a man at a university
in
Canada. Only the man links to his faculty page, whereas I assume the spelling might be an issue with the woman's link--is there really a DeMoines University?
I've run across a handful of pairs like this on Wikipedia, both active editors, just like these two--Nesbit just editing a few days ago, Sue posting a poorly written snowball of an article to FAC today. They seem more like socks, to me, than the random rantors that pop up on this list
every once in a while. They come up in unusual situations, like GA nominations, FAC. Sue Rangell's nomination for FAC was such a poorly written article, ridiculously made into a series of lists, that I
wondered
what else she had done. Not much considering she only made her user
page
and first edit a week ago, but has already been giving away barnstars
like
crazy and getting awards, too.
I suppose there is some obvious explanation for this, so I'll just ask User:Nesbit if User:Sue Rangell is his sock puppet. But like last time
I
asked this, I just got a denial, although the editor in question did
stop
supporting him/herself on GA nominations.
Am I missing something? I suppose if the socks are not misbehaving it's not an issue, so maybe that's why administrators are not commenting upon these.
But check user? Similar whiney rants on this list? It's not like
whining
requires finese and originality, especially when angry.
KP _______________________________________________ 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