you could council outsiders in productive ways of working with wikipedia.
but instead we have repeated use of technical tools to deal with people
problems.

so no - no validation from me. rest assured , There will be
consequences for the bitey  behavior.



On Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 7:04 PM V C <[email protected]> wrote:

> We have declared all multiple accounts of people brought in with no COI
> only to be accused of socking. Is there a “correct” way to handle this?
>
> HTTPS://viki.wiki
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: V C <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 6:53 PM
> Subject: Fwd: Rambling Rambler userspace harrassment, edit warring,
> hounding, suppression of women's achievements on wikipedia
> To: <[email protected]>
>
>
> Edit warring affecting women artists
>
>
> victoria campbell <http://victoriacampbell.io>
> +12108975814
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: V C <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 6:49 PM
> Subject: Rambling Rambler userspace harrassment, edit warring, hounding,
> suppression of women's achievements on wikipedia
> To: <[email protected]>
>
>
> Can anyone give advice on this? I am writing from a gallery trying to
> update pages with contributions from recent scholarship and the other
> editors are SPA's with good intent but new. We have faced serious hounding,
> harassment, etc, and any attempt to declare COI or SPA is subject to
> predictive policing of edits, not quality of content or sources.
>
> Thank you,
>
> VC
>
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents
>
> This user has blanked out their talk page history which reveals repeated
> persistent assumption of bad faith, repeated arbitrary or unmotivated
> removal of any content without appropriate discussion or providing
> explanation, filing incident reports intended to marginalize or ostracize,
> stonewalling and the abuse of editor tools or other forms of algorithmic
> governance to prevent deletion discussions or consensus.
>
> User is hounding expert editors with "evidence" as to canvassing,
> sockpuppetry, etc, while masquerading as an administrator. This user is not
> an administrator.
>
> Diff comparison exhibits the usual mistakes of a new editor and traces of
> a clean start but no evidence of bad faith contribs from an undesired
> fidelity
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=An_undesired_fidelity&action=edit&redlink=1>
>
> A call to improve pages related to Marcel Duchamp and his peers was
> broadcast over art world mailing list with links to diffs. No specific
> instruction to promote a certain point of view but the need to ensure
> legacy sources already cited in article was emphasized. Materials (like
> images) sourced from toutfait don't give proper attn to the scholarship
> they are sourced from; this is in breach of fair use of these resources for
> educational purposes. If Wikipedia wants to suppress recent scholarship,
> they can pay royalties -- but I'm not the person they would be dealing with
> to do so because I'm actually not affiliated beyond the art world with any
> of these subjects, alive or dead.
>
> I have checked Wikipedia policy and this does not seem to be in violation
> of rules, might be better to host an edit-a-thon than pull in new editors
> but otherwise in the range of acceptable behavior on Wikipedia.
>
> Cloaked redirect to avoid discussion to delete
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spiritual_America&action=history> 
> despite
> this affecting female-founded art gallery with notability for mounting
> first presentation of artwork by Richard Prince
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Prince>; page erases women's
> contributions to redirect to RP with a focus on illicit content rather than
> historical exhibitions by well known artists of the Pictures Generation
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pictures_Generation>. Ownership behavior.
>
> Rhonda Roland Shearer
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rhonda_Roland_Shearer&oldid=1316322946>
>  now
> features unsourced lede, suppression of content, damage to context for
> appreciation for 'womens work'
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rhonda_Roland_Shearer&oldid=1317112338>
> ; Rambling Rambler
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rambling_Rambler&action=edit&redlink=1>
>  is
> now calling for protected status of page after demonstrating ownership
> behavior
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ownership_of_content#Examples_of_ownership_behavior>
>  with
> no evidence of actual abuse wrt SPA <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPA>'s
> or indication that updates to these pages was excessively promotional,
> unbalanced
>
> this edit provides only empirical object data for this readymade
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hat_Rack_(Duchamp)>, but drafted
> without concern for this work as currently part of an educational effort on
> the part of many editors
>
> In advance of the broken arm
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=In_Advance_of_the_Broken_Arm&oldid=1316733103>
>  now
> has a confusing photograph with questionable copyright: how is it a digital
> rendering and also a photograph (with camera data)?? confusing as to how
> this is an "ordinary manufactured object"
>
> LHOOQ
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=L.H.O.O.Q.&oldid=1316838120> has
> had its version history removed despite the size of the object referenced
> in article is obviously too big to be a found postcard and so watered
> down to previous version <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L.H.O.O.Q.>
>
> This is but a selection of the biased, false, inaccurate or inappropriate
> content, or hindering, impeding or otherwise hampering the creation (and/or
> maintenance) of content that seems to be a pattern of behavior for Rambling
> Rambler
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rambling_Rambler&action=edit&redlink=1>
> .
>
> Asking for audit of sock accounts & quality of contributions be weighted
> wrt pattern of revert warring on RRS page since July/August and lots of
> hostility when "socks" are asked to disclose COI's. Unclear how a COI can
> exist at the same time as copyright violations: either socks are working
> for ppl that would give them permission to use pics for promotional
> purposes, or pics are being used w/o permission and therefore no COI.
>
> Please pick one and consider the impact of these changes on the state of
> the field and for the experience of new editors on wikipedia. — Preceding
> unsigned <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signatures> comment
> added by Alyssadavisgallery
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alyssadavisgallery> (talk
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Alyssadavisgallery#top> •
> contribs
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Alyssadavisgallery>) 
> 22:14,
> 16 October 2025 (UTC)
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#c-Alyssadavisgallery-20251016221400-Rambling_Rambler_userspace_harrassment,_edit_warring,_hounding,_suppression_of_w>
> Without comment as to the above complaint, I want to note that slightly
> earlier I filed a sockpuppet investigation related to OP's account: 
> Wikipedia:Sockpuppet
> investigations/An undesired fidelity
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/An_undesired_fidelity>.
> — *rsjaffe* <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rsjaffe> 🗣️
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rsjaffe> 22:22, 16 October 2025
> (UTC)
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#c-Rsjaffe-20251016222200-Alyssadavisgallery-20251016221400>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Clean_start all have the right to
> clean start but userspace harrassment, hounding and abuse of consensus are
> universally against conduct. I am getting involved because my IP is used
> for multiple purposes by multiple people and am not connected to other
> people trying to improve pages on the subject matter. Alyssadavisgallery
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alyssadavisgallery> (talk
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Alyssadavisgallery>) 22:25, 16
> October 2025 (UTC)
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#c-Alyssadavisgallery-20251016222500-Rsjaffe-20251016222200>You
> were blocked, so, no, you do not, in fact, have the right to a clean start.
> Any uninvolved administrator should feel free to close this nonsense
> immediately. See User:An undesired fidelity
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:An_undesired_fidelity>. *Bgsu98*
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bgsu98> (Talk)
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bgsu98> 22:30, 16 October 2025
> (UTC)
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#c-Bgsu98-20251016223000-Alyssadavisgallery-20251016222500>
>
>
>
>
> victoria campbell <http://victoriacampbell.io>
> +12108975814
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
> visit:
> %(web_page_url)slistinfo%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/gendergap.lists.wikimedia.org/

Reply via email to