[WikiEN-l] Re: I just blocked someone for 9999 hours 1 more thing

Tue May 11 12:08:49 UTC 2004

I agree with Theresa. We had a case a couple of nights ago where a new 
anonymous poster was adding misleading information to [[Football 
(soccer)]] among others. Start at stage one with the template "use the 
sandbox for your tests next time" message on his talk page, and revert 
all his edits. Forty minutes later he's still at it, so put an "OI!! 
KNOCK IT OFF!!..." message on his talkpage (from his edits he was 
obviously British so would understand the language!), with a warning 
he'd be banned if he carries on; revert again. Result, no more is heard 
from this anon.

While I'm discussing this case, I would like to argue that we have been 
far too lenient with people who make edits concerning fictitious 
subjects as if they were real. I'm quite happy for people to discuss 
Tolkienisms and Star Trekisms if they make it clear that it's "In the 
universe of J.R.R. Tolkien...." or "In the Star Trek universe...", but 
it's not acceptable they write about them as if they were in our world. 
In the case in point, the poster had a "thing" about Olli Freyr 
Oskarsson, who is a real footballer who plays for the obscure Icelandic 
team, Thor Akureyri; however in the "Championship Manager" computer game 
he is apparently a very desirable player and this poster seemed to be 
writing about this players' performance in one his game campaigns! While 
to someone on this side of the pond with an interest in football, it's 
obviously preposterous to write about Huddersfield Town winning the 
Champions League, I wouldn't expect someone in the US to realise that, 
just as I would have no idea if someone was posting rubbish about 
baseball or NFL or NHL teams. I feel we need to have a stronger 
reaction against posters who wilfully post disinformation, whether "just 
as a joke" or otherwise.

Arwel

In message 
<C88C309EC75BC245876B4647FFD6FBCCA075E5 at emailserv.queens.harley>, 
"KNOTT, T" <tknott-Ek59Oj94Ld+1Qrn1Bg8BZw at public.gmane.org> writes
>Calm down Danny. You are overreacting.
> 
>Firstly you don?t need quickpolls, and you don?t need to go through
>speedy deletions.
> 
>But you don?t need to be so harsh either. This is just some kid mucking
>about. We deal with this kind of thing all the time. (well I do anyway) I go
>through a procedure
> 
>
>1)       Talk page. You must warn them on their talk page first. It?s only
>polite. Tell him he can?t take down wikipedia, so give up. Invite him to
>contribute properly.
>2)       Talk page again. Stern warning this time
>
>3)       delete nonsense articles and protect real ones as necessary,
>explain what you are doing
>
>4)       Block for 24 hours
>
>5)       Block for longer if necessary
> 
>I rarely get to stage 5
> 
> 
> 
>-----Original Message-----
>From: daniwo59-YDxpq3io04c at public.gmane.org
>[mailto:daniwo59-YDxpq3io04c at public.gmane.org]
>Sent: 11 May 2004 12:18
>To: wikien-l-g2DCOkC13y2GglJvpFV4uA at public.gmane.org
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] I just blocked someone for 9999 hours 1 more
>thing
> 
>I also propose doing this without pontificating about it for six months. That
>is six months of potential damage to Wikipedia.
> 
>Danny
>

-- 
Arwel Parry
http://www.cartref.demon.co.uk/