Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Bradv/Archive 24) (bot |
→mail call: Signpost under-a-cloud + hi Brad! : |
||
Line 136: | Line 136: | ||
::::::{{tq|The reason I prefer email is that I don't have to go thru writing and editing the article on-Wiki while two or three people watch over my shoulder. Have you ever tried doing that and answering their questions at the same time?}} well...Brad ''is'' a former arbitrator... [[User:GeneralNotability|GeneralNotability]] ([[User talk:GeneralNotability|talk]]) 00:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC) |
::::::{{tq|The reason I prefer email is that I don't have to go thru writing and editing the article on-Wiki while two or three people watch over my shoulder. Have you ever tried doing that and answering their questions at the same time?}} well...Brad ''is'' a former arbitrator... [[User:GeneralNotability|GeneralNotability]] ([[User talk:GeneralNotability|talk]]) 00:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC) |
||
::::::Well, I suppose it is an opinion piece and you can share your opinion how you like. But I would think that Jimbo resigning his administrator privileges in disgrace would be headline news that would warrant some objective reporting. – [[User:Bradv|<span style="color:#333">'''brad''v'''''</span>]] 01:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC) |
::::::Well, I suppose it is an opinion piece and you can share your opinion how you like. But I would think that Jimbo resigning his administrator privileges in disgrace would be headline news that would warrant some objective reporting. – [[User:Bradv|<span style="color:#333">'''brad''v'''''</span>]] 01:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC) |
||
Favourite quote, from Beeblebrox ([https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=12924&start=100#p324358 here]): |
|||
<blockquote>The supposed smoking gun was a screenshot from someone calling themselves "Wikipedia editor" that supposedly proved that this person as Bradv. The proof they submitted of their identity as a Wikipedia admin was very obviously either photoshopped or faked up on a private wiki. Anyone even mildly familiar with Wikipedia terminology and processes could see it was a fake. It also showed BradV signing a post with a full last name, which he never did that I know of. I have no idea if the name I saw even is Brad's real last name. The point is it was laughably fake, to the point where I suspect Jimbo probably had not even actually seen it with his own eyes before he went after Brad, and ego got in his way after that. |
|||
The scammers clearly knew they had a whale here, someone who had money, wanted an article about themselves, and had absolutely no understanding whatsoever of what Wikipedia is and how it works. They just wanted to buy their way in, and only became upset when they did not get the results they were paying for. So, they reached out to who they assumed was the guy who actually runs everything, Jimbo, to talk one rich overlord to another. |
|||
In short: the person Jimbo has been referring to as "the victim" is a rich person who wanted to buy their portion of Wikipedia. They were led to believe they were buying off admins and arbs to make sure their article was bulletproof. I have zero sympathy for them. If 20K was really that big of a deal to them, they would not have spent it on something they clearly knew nothing about. The victim here is Wikipedia, and BradV in particular.</blockquote> |
|||
Chances of seeing criticism like that featured at the under-a-cloud ''Signpost'', though... probably not great. It seem that to its editor/s, the emperor must remain clothed! Good to see you, Brad. You've been missed.{{smiley}} [[User:El_C|El_C]] 06:50, 19 April 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 06:50, 19 April 2023
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27
Response to Possible Vandalism on my Wikipedia Article
Hi Landplane123, I was made aware by Bradv that my page might have been subjected to vandalism. I see that you made some recent edits on my article and was wondering if you received any notifications about this. Please let me know as I was informed that my page could be in danger of being deleted.
Thank you for your immediate response Kwakeley (talk) 19:57, 11 February 2023 (UTC) Kwakeley
Kwakeley I created your Wikipedia article and removed some content as there was a notification that there was too much personal information that might be of interest to only a small audience. Perhaps this happened because I recently changed my username to Landplane123 from pennyframstad as I did not want to be using my personal name for Wikipedia edits. I will contact Bradv directly to get to the bottom of this. Sorry for any inconvenience.
- Best, Landplane123 (talk) 20:03, 11 February 2023 (UTC) Landplane123
Hi Bradv,
Kwakeley reached out to me letting me know that he received a notification about possible vandalism to his Wikipedia article. I created Kitt's article and check on my edits frequently and saw a notification on his page that there was personal information that might only be of interest to a small audience so I removed a section from his page that elaborated on his adoption story and his sister finding him recently.
I recently changed my username to Landplane123 from pennyframstad as I did not want to be using my personal name for Wikipedia edits. Perhaps this might be the reason and you couldn't see my editing history? That is the only content that I planned on removing and will only be making additions from here on out.
Please let me know that you received this so I can move forward with adding content to Kitt's page.
Thank you so much, Landplane123 (talk) 20:36, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Landplane123
- Bradv hasn't edited in months. I am another administrator - please can you let me know what this is about? Feel free to move it to my talk page, Bradv probably doesn't need a bunch of notifications. Girth Summit (blether) 15:28, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
WikiExperts?
Boldly closing this and tweaking the heading. It's not fair to Bradv to have this conversation on his public usertalk when he's not around. If I were feeling a bit bolder, I'd blank this whole section with advice to handle this privately per what others wrote, and an FYI that this is a very common scam. Obviously if anyone objects they can undo this. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 20:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I have what seems to me a credible report that you have been recommending to people that they use WikiExperts. Is this true? The report I have is that you contacted someone through Whatsapp to recommend WikiExperts, who then charged someone $15,000 for an article in Wikipedia. I am asking you because if so, then you definitely should not be an admin in English Wikipedia. If it is a lie, then fine. But please tell me the truth. Jimbo Wales (talk) 22:15, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
I am very disappointed in what I am seeing here. Jimbo Wales, have you emailed Arbcom about this? Unlike everyone else, I am not going to be quick to jump to Bradv's side. However, you should have contacted Arbcom, and not publicly humiliated him on his talk page. I am keeping an open mind on this, but if the allegations turn out to be nonsense, I think you owe him an apology. Scorpions13256 (talk) 00:24, 10 April 2023 (UTC) |
Arbcom Case
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Paid editing recruitment allegation and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.
Thanks, obviously I'm not expecting you to respond in the matter, just making you aware as required. -- Amanda (she/her) 23:15, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- This arbitration case request has been closed as declined by the committee. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 15:43, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- As the allegation was made here, and the case was only indirectly about the substance of the allegation against Bradv, I'd like to say clearly that the evidence which came before ArbCom showed an obvious joe job, and that there was no hint that the real Bradv had any involvement with the UPE scam. Cabayi (talk) 16:37, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
My response
I have spent the last several hours reading through the conversation on my talk page and elsewhere over the past few days. While much of what needed to be said has been said already, I thought I would write down a few thoughts of my own, and perhaps reiterate the wise words of others.
First of all, thank you to all those who came to my defence. Not only is it heart-warming to see this level of support from the community, you have all made excellent points that ultimately raise awareness of issues involved paid editing, off-wiki communication, and administrator competence.
Obviously, the allegations made by Jimbo Wales are entirely untrue and without merit. I don't really feel the need to respond to them, but I would be remiss in posting a message here without including this point.
Sadly, the practice of conning potential article subjects for outrageous sums of money is all too common. Jimbo makes the point that we need to do a better job of communicating the risks involved in hiring paid editors, and on this point I wholeheartedly agree. In my time as an arbitrator I encountered several instances of people paying for articles and then emailing ArbCom when they ultimately got ripped off. The point I always want to make to these people, and the one we should be shouting from the rooftops, is that you do not need to pay to have an article written about you. If you or the things you've done really are worthy of an article, we will write it for free.
Not only do we need to communicate these risks to our readers, it seems we also need to do a better job of communicating that to our editors. Any one who wants to be active in the area of combatting undisclosed paid editing needs to watch out for scams, including blackmail, extortion, and obvious joe jobs. This includes the most basic steps of checking someone's contributions before accusing them of impropriety. And if the evidence is unclear, getting a second opinion from someone else experienced in this area of editing before publicizing allegations, especially those involving off-wiki conduct, is imperative.
While I have not received an apology from Jimbo for anything beyond the "tone" of his inquiry, I do not require one. I don't believe the initial query was made out of malice. Rather, Jimbo has been disconnected from the community for quite some time, and does not have a full appreciation of the depth of knowledge and experience that the editing community has in dealing with issues like these. I am pleased that Jimbo has recognized this and resigned many of his advanced user rights, instead entrusting them solely to those trusted by the community.
Lastly, as a former arb I can't help but point out that the laying down of these tools was done under a cloud, and should not be restored without community consensus. (Seriously, I tried to not include this point, but it really needs to be said.) – bradv 04:21, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- Nice response. Valereee (talk) 12:53, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- Good to hear from you Bradv, albeit in a set of circumstances that really ought not to have arisen. Hope you're keeping well. Girth Summit (blether) 13:03, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- Brad, it is really great to hear from you. I'm glad you are doing well, and I'm sorry this pathetic character assassination occurred in your absence, but I suspect that was the goal of the scammers, to use the name of someone who was not around to deny it. As a former arb, you know how fraught these situations can be. I know you to be a person who has a strong sense of ethics, so the very idea that you might have traded in your seat on Arbcom for a UPE ring was shockingly unlikely, but.... stranger things have happened. I certainly did not want this to be true, and luckily, once we saw the supposed evidence linking you to said ring, it was obviously, laughably, incompetently, fake.
- That it fooled a clueless rich person who wanted nothing but to buy their own article on here and was acting under the apparent assumption that all admins and even arbs are basically for sale for the right price is not surprising. That said person turned to the person they assumed, as the founder, was the boss of all these corrupt people they believed they had been paying off is also not surprising. That said founder just swallowed this obvious bullshit and started repeating it on-wiki, that was very surprising.
- I of course agree with you that the resignation of advanced permissions was very much under a cloud. I don't see how anyone could see it any other way. There is certainly more we could be doing to educate the public about UPE scams, but this was done in the absolute worst possible way, and it took quite a bit of pressure to get the supposed evidence to even be submitted in the proper way. This whole episode was emberassing for the entire project, but that doesn't seem to have sunk in for the person who caused it.
- Anyway, keep doing great out there Brad. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:19, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Beeblebrox, well said. Also, something occurred to me today: if someone was really duped out of $15k for a Wikipedia article, that says two important things about the state of this project: First, having an article on Wikipedia is very desirable. Second, getting an article about a non-notable subject past the so-called "moderators" is incredibly difficult. These are both good things. – bradv 00:11, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
mail call
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Smallbones(smalltalk) 17:45, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- I have read your email. I do not feel the need to discuss this privately at this time, as the only things I know about these allegations are from what was posted on my talk page. – bradv 22:56, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Smallbones, if you are going to quote parts of my statement above in your article, please try to balance it and not just pick the two sentences that were the most charitable to Jimbo. If you can't figure out a way to do that, just quote the whole thing. cc: JPxG – bradv 00:02, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- Christ, the current Signpost staff are a fucking disgrace to this project. Just resign already, @Smallbones, JPxG, and Bri: SN54129 00:10, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- Indeed. I had to scroll down two whole screens before finding something that suggests the allegations might be untrue. @Smallbones, how about quoting ArbCom's statement above? They've seen the "evidence" – I haven't. – bradv 00:26, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- The reason I prefer email is that I don't have to go thru writing and editing the article on-Wiki while two or three people watch over my shoulder. Have you ever tried doing that and answering their questions at the same time? I had already quoted the arbcom decision up top. I did not just quote 2 sentences from your statement about. It was 6, now 7. I'll look at the top of the article again, but I thought it was obvious that Jimbo's question was highly disputed starting about the 2nd paragraph. Thanks for your understanding. Smallbones(smalltalk) 00:46, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
The reason I prefer email is that I don't have to go thru writing and editing the article on-Wiki while two or three people watch over my shoulder. Have you ever tried doing that and answering their questions at the same time?
well...Brad is a former arbitrator... GeneralNotability (talk) 00:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)- Well, I suppose it is an opinion piece and you can share your opinion how you like. But I would think that Jimbo resigning his administrator privileges in disgrace would be headline news that would warrant some objective reporting. – bradv 01:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- The reason I prefer email is that I don't have to go thru writing and editing the article on-Wiki while two or three people watch over my shoulder. Have you ever tried doing that and answering their questions at the same time? I had already quoted the arbcom decision up top. I did not just quote 2 sentences from your statement about. It was 6, now 7. I'll look at the top of the article again, but I thought it was obvious that Jimbo's question was highly disputed starting about the 2nd paragraph. Thanks for your understanding. Smallbones(smalltalk) 00:46, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- Indeed. I had to scroll down two whole screens before finding something that suggests the allegations might be untrue. @Smallbones, how about quoting ArbCom's statement above? They've seen the "evidence" – I haven't. – bradv 00:26, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- Christ, the current Signpost staff are a fucking disgrace to this project. Just resign already, @Smallbones, JPxG, and Bri: SN54129 00:10, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Smallbones, if you are going to quote parts of my statement above in your article, please try to balance it and not just pick the two sentences that were the most charitable to Jimbo. If you can't figure out a way to do that, just quote the whole thing. cc: JPxG – bradv 00:02, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
Favourite quote, from Beeblebrox (here):
The supposed smoking gun was a screenshot from someone calling themselves "Wikipedia editor" that supposedly proved that this person as Bradv. The proof they submitted of their identity as a Wikipedia admin was very obviously either photoshopped or faked up on a private wiki. Anyone even mildly familiar with Wikipedia terminology and processes could see it was a fake. It also showed BradV signing a post with a full last name, which he never did that I know of. I have no idea if the name I saw even is Brad's real last name. The point is it was laughably fake, to the point where I suspect Jimbo probably had not even actually seen it with his own eyes before he went after Brad, and ego got in his way after that.
The scammers clearly knew they had a whale here, someone who had money, wanted an article about themselves, and had absolutely no understanding whatsoever of what Wikipedia is and how it works. They just wanted to buy their way in, and only became upset when they did not get the results they were paying for. So, they reached out to who they assumed was the guy who actually runs everything, Jimbo, to talk one rich overlord to another.
In short: the person Jimbo has been referring to as "the victim" is a rich person who wanted to buy their portion of Wikipedia. They were led to believe they were buying off admins and arbs to make sure their article was bulletproof. I have zero sympathy for them. If 20K was really that big of a deal to them, they would not have spent it on something they clearly knew nothing about. The victim here is Wikipedia, and BradV in particular.
Chances of seeing criticism like that featured at the under-a-cloud Signpost, though... probably not great. It seem that to its editor/s, the emperor must remain clothed! Good to see you, Brad. You've been missed. El_C 06:50, 19 April 2023 (UTC)