Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2024-05-16/Arbitration report

Discuss this story

The AllisonW Affair is very much "the mystery of the withheld theme", to quote Otto Rank (by way of Anaïs Nin). More generally this Arbitration Report is a scroll of high-end flame-outs as fascinating as it is appalling. kencf0618 (talk) 11:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't here for the last time a report like this happened, so it's fascinating reading through these cases and seeing the similarities between some of them. Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 12:56, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Jonathunder hasn't posted again after discussing having a long and serious illness. I met him in 2019 at the Boston Wikimedia conference and was impressed by his enthusiasm, energy level, and overall love of editing and photographing for Commons. I don't think that he is (hopefully not 'was') a Wikipedian who would have left because of an arb case. Does anyone know if he is okay? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:01, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for a very interesting (and often entertaining) report. Toughpigs (talk) 15:00, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for recognising the (to my mind, very sad) departure of the ultra-prolific BHG. I had been disappointed not to see her case mentioned in The Signpost at the time. PamD 16:03, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this. When I opened the page, I thought, Gee, I'll never read all the way to the bottom of this, only to find myself riveted, entertained and informed for the next half hour. --Andreas JN 466 18:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll pile on by adding my thanks. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:31, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I commented over on WPO that I assumed the lack of coverage was due to lack of resources, and not malice, unfounded speculation is sadly all too common over there, but I would also question why you would repeatedly call it a "badsite" when WP:BADSITES is a failed proposal from over a decade ago. I get that you feel personally attacked by those threads, because they do personally attack you, that's simply a fact. What I don't expect is that your hurt feelings over it be reflected in what is supposed to be neutral reporting about Wikipedia, not a place for you to try and fight back against those who are demonizing you on WPO. Regardless, I would say this is otherwise a fairly decent summation of a whole lot of arb business and I'm glad to see arbitration reporting return to the Signpost. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 21:34, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
in fairness, he only called it a "badsite" twice in one sentence of the final paragraph of a very long article ... sawyer * he/they * talk 22:03, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In further fairness, saying a website that stokes stalking and harassment isn't so good of a site (perhaps, even, a 'bad site') doesn't seem all that partisan a take. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 21:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Forsooth -- one begins to suspect that perhaps my linking to the WP:BADSITES proposal may not have been intended as a direct endorsement of the essay and all it contains, or yet perhapser indeed that it's a tongue-in-cheek reference to the ubiqitous Wikipedia obsession with Voldemort-like circumlocution on the name of a website notable enough that we have a mainspace article about it. Perhaps this is even a more-likely explanation than me being so impotently blown away by the towering intellect of the website that I've been reduced to inchoate paraoxysms of befuddled rage. At any rate, since when does some guy posting your real name on a website mean you're bound by a permanent nondisparagement clause? I don't remember that on the user signup form... jp×g 🗯️ 08:39, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Jacob Gotts aka JPxG: liar or braindead?" #WhyNotBoth? FeRDNYC (talk) 08:54, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Aaaaand another thanks from me. Crunchydillpickle🥒 (talk) 22:05, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I guess one could apply to Wikipedia an old saying about academe: the fights are so vicious because the stakes are so low. At least the same reasons exist in both worlds. -- llywrch (talk) 23:15, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the report, the soap opera Cliff-notes approach was entertaining and your prose were excellent. See ya in the pit! —tim /// Carrite (talk) 23:18, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delightful and informative. At times I felt like a ghoul chortling over slasher movies and airliner crash investigation reports. Jim.henderson (talk) 01:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently the half-dozen desysops for cause covered by this story aren't enough to satisfy the community – the biggest thing to come out of requests-for-sysop reform will be a new requests-for-desysop process, which will only accelerate the rate of decline of administrators. – wbm1058 (talk) 03:25, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Re: the SmallCats case - is this diff link correct? The link is presented as something inexplicable, but on clicking it all I see is some standard copy editing. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 15:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i was wondering about that too! ... sawyer * he/they * talk 17:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The year 2007 in the original diff link is telling – by simply adding a 1 at the start (that is, by adding one billion to the ID) we get what was meant: Special:Diff/1167933153. —⁠andrybak (talk) 19:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed and forsooth. I was quite confused by this error myself. I think I do need to write a script to autoconvert diff links... jp×g 🗯️ 05:35, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

JPxG, there are User:Enterprisey/diff-permalink and User:Enterprisey/diff-permalink-2 for doing the conversion during browsing. —⁠andrybak (talk) 05:57, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll join the chorus here and say this was well done. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 20:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm suddenly reminded of the Parks & Recreation atrocities map. (Leslie Knope, standing in front of a map of Pawnee in blue, with 10 or so white dots scattered throughout the town:)
This is a map of all the atrocities the Pawnee settlers inflicted upon the Wamapoke Indians. ... ... ...The atrocities are in blue.
FeRDNYC (talk) 06:03, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can I just say, I love the idea that there's such a thing as the Wikimedia Foundation's disinformation team, and I firmly choose to believe that said team does exactly what it says on the tin: Seeds out disinformation regarding the Wikimedia Foundation among the larger community. I mean, it tracks! FeRDNYC (talk) 08:39, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]