[WikiEN-l] Missed Opportunities to have avoided the Durova Case

[Wily D]

On 11/27/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman at spamcop.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 11:04:50 -0500, "Wily D"
> <wilydoppelganger at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >One could hope, but a lot of us are genuinely afraid that trying to
> >write an encyclopaedia is going to get us banned for various reasons,
> >and would like to feel safe that we're not going to wake up banned as
> >a sockpuppet of Wikipedia Review member X or whatnot.
>
> That's *extremely* unlikely to happen, *especially* if you are using
> and have only ever used one account.
>
> Sure, it happened once.  Hands up anyone who wants to try it again?
> Any takers?  Not me, I can tell you.
>
> Guy (JzG)
> --

No offenve, JzG, but your reassurances aren't very reassuring.  I have
no idea how often something like this has happened, nor do I have any
idea how likely it is to happen in the future.  We're talking about a
ban based on essentially no evidence, that could happen to anyone,
with no hope of appeal other than "popularity".  Should I believe I
have enough clout to get myself unbanned if I'm banned on secret
evidence I can't question or know anything about?  I might be able to
(one Wikipedian of some prominance knows my real life identity, and
might help me out if I asked nice-like) but should we be telling more
"paltry" editors that nobody cares if they get banned over nothing and
nobody will help them?

It'd probably be easy enough to make a case against me as strong as
the one against !! - I cited a source for my data in my very first
edit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Local_Group&diff=prev&oldid=24396177
Figured out immeadiately that I should sign edits:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Local_Group&diff=prev&oldid=24396229
Demonstrated knowledge of redirects by edit five:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alpher-Bethe-Gamow_paper&diff=prev&oldid=24406702
Demonstrated knowledge of the "Vandalism" lingo by edit 17:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Arrested_Development_%28TV_series%29&diff=prev&oldid=30222513
My 23rd edit shows I have some clue of what's going on, using the term
"encyclopaedic" at an AfD:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Conducting_Business_in_Canada&diff=prev&oldid=30511759
Heck, here I am proposing an article for deletion around edit 30:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Fran%27s_Restaurant%2C_Toronto&diff=prev&oldid=31080248

It goes on and on.   Anyone familiar with wikis and with a
prediliction for reading instructions is going to look like a
returning user if your evidence standards are shabby.   The real
trouble is ''How do get a ban undone if I cannot find out why I was
banned?'' - The answer is almost certainly ''I cannot''.  !! got his
ban overturned because he was popular - how popular am I?  Enough?  I
don't know ...

Dismissing the fears of (at least two members of) the community simply
because you think they're overblown is not the way to create a
positive working space.  Overblown are not, they are a reasonable
result of what's going on, and the uncertainty caused by the lack of
knowledge most editors have.  Every edit I've made to [[WP:NPA]],
[[WT:NPA]] and [WP&WT:LINKLOVE]] has left a sinking feeling in my
heart I'm going to see a blocked notice next time I log in.  I'm not
the only one ... if we want to create a good environment from working,
we need to free productive, helpful, good faith authors and editors
from the quite reasonable fear they could wake up with an
uncontestable block.

Cheers
WilyD