[Wikimedia-l] The end

[Chris Sherlock]

I've just been blocked forever. I've been bullied, and I'm having suicidal 
thoughts.

I don't know what to do now.

Right now I'm reaching out to anyone who might listen.  I've been called 
obsessive, someone who attacks people, I've not been listened to and I've been 
lectured on policy by people who quote three letter shortcuts at me without 
reading the policy.

An admin just told me that I had submitted too many kilobytes which violated 
some sort of policy. When I pointed out that half of the kilobytes were 
references I was ignored. When I pointed out that the one reverting me was 
deleting no contentious stuff I was told I was being contentious. When I 
pointed out I had been told I'm not allowed to use primary sources in any way 
and the policy was its ok but to use it with care, and all I was doing was 
checking a company directorship, I was ignored. 

I wrote your [[exploding whale]] article. I invented your [citation needed] 
tag. I started your admins noticeboard. 

But I'm not well, and nobody on Wikipedia seems to be kind. You are all so busy 
power tripping that you forget there is a real, live person on the other side. 
A person who is wounded. I haven't always been this depressed. Not anxious. I 
stupidly logged into my account yesterday, one that nobody knew I used, and 
tried to edit the Salim Mehajer article. I was surprised it wasn't there, but 
I've never been so obstructed I all my life. It's not even that there was a 
disagreement, it was like I wasn't worth anything. I spent hours of my time 
researching the article, trying to do a good job. But in an instant the 
material was ripped away, and I was called obsessed. 

That's not what I was called when I rewrote the [[USA PATRIOT Act]] article. 
People told me it was long, but they were encouraging. My hard work was 
appreciated. 

I've never attacked the subject of the article, Salim Mehajer. But when I was 
called obsessive, I guess something broke inside me. I reached badly and called 
the guy who called me obsessive a twit. Then I wrote a bitter article and 
posted it on my blog. You can read it here:

http://randomtechnicalstuff.blogspot.com.au/2016/05/dont-bite-newbies-why-wikipedia-is-such.html

Then I stewed. I couldn't stop thinking about how I'd tried to get a decent 
article sorted out again, but I just couldn't seem to get traction.

I originally had taken material from the [[City of Auburn]] article that was 
about the individual. I should have realised it was partisan, and it was a bad 
judgement call. I write done more material, but it was far too negative. I 
guess o didn't see it that way at the time. 

I recall I went to bed and the next day I was accused of writing an attack 
article and an admin slapped on not one but two template telling me I was about 
to be blocked. Then I discovered the article had been deleted. Nobody had 
notified me. I couldn't work out what had happened. Then I realised it had been 
deleted. 

So I tried again. This time I started from scratch. I started to edit very 
carefully. I started with a paragraph stub which just very, very briefly noted 
Mehajor is a deputy mayor and property developer. I think I wrote a short 
paragraph Bout his wedding which was very notable. It's in the history.

Then it was put up for deletion again. In the A7 category. I'm rusty at 
Wikipedia, sure, but what? A7? It was for notability. But, I thought, how? The 
man is highly significant! Not a day goes by without the media talking of his 
exploits!

So I objected. The editor rounded on me. He's famous for being famous, like a 
Kardashian! he said. But I said, he was a deputy mayor and he's been in the 
Australian media extensively! It's not just his wedding (which was notorious) - 
it's his property deals, and his companies, and he got his entire council 
sacked! And he is in court all the time and is under an AFP investigation! That 
*is* notable!

But, I was told, there's not enough In the article. I was referred to another 
acronym about notability. But I know about notability policy, I thought. It's 
about the subject, not the content of the article.., desperately I hunted 
through the policy git the section on this. I'd read it before, years ago. If 
the article was deleted before I got a chance to object, I'd be called a troll, 
or worse. I'd be blocked for recreating it. In the nick of time I found the 
section and objected, and I asked to have it put on Articles For Deletion. And 
I pointed out I was literally editing the article when it was almost deleted - 
because it didn't establish enough context. But, I thought, how do you 
establish context of the article is deleted midway through editing it? 

The editor took off the CSD template. I breathed a sigh of relief. Then they 
stick on a {{notability}} template. This, I was informed, meant that the 
article could be merged, redirected, or deleted if notability couldn't be 
determined. But, I thought - I just established that! I didn't want it to b

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The end

[Pete Forsyth]

Reaching out offlist. Anyone who knows Chris well and has helpful input,
feel free to contact me offlist.
-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Chris Sherlock 
wrote:

>
> I've just been blocked forever. I've been bullied, and I'm having suicidal
> thoughts.
>
> I don't know what to do now.
>
> Right now I'm reaching out to anyone who might listen.  I've been called
> obsessive, someone who attacks people, I've not been listened to and I've
> been lectured on policy by people who quote three letter shortcuts at me
> without reading the policy.
>
> An admin just told me that I had submitted too many kilobytes which
> violated some sort of policy. When I pointed out that half of the kilobytes
> were references I was ignored. When I pointed out that the one reverting me
> was deleting no contentious stuff I was told I was being contentious. When
> I pointed out I had been told I'm not allowed to use primary sources in any
> way and the policy was its ok but to use it with care, and all I was doing
> was checking a company directorship, I was ignored.
>
> I wrote your [[exploding whale]] article. I invented your [citation
> needed] tag. I started your admins noticeboard.
>
> But I'm not well, and nobody on Wikipedia seems to be kind. You are all so
> busy power tripping that you forget there is a real, live person on the
> other side. A person who is wounded. I haven't always been this depressed.
> Not anxious. I stupidly logged into my account yesterday, one that nobody
> knew I used, and tried to edit the Salim Mehajer article. I was surprised
> it wasn't there, but I've never been so obstructed I all my life. It's not
> even that there was a disagreement, it was like I wasn't worth anything. I
> spent hours of my time researching the article, trying to do a good job.
> But in an instant the material was ripped away, and I was called obsessed.
>
> That's not what I was called when I rewrote the [[USA PATRIOT Act]]
> article. People told me it was long, but they were encouraging. My hard
> work was appreciated.
>
> I've never attacked the subject of the article, Salim Mehajer. But when I
> was called obsessive, I guess something broke inside me. I reached badly
> and called the guy who called me obsessive a twit. Then I wrote a bitter
> article and posted it on my blog. You can read it here:
>
>
> http://randomtechnicalstuff.blogspot.com.au/2016/05/dont-bite-newbies-why-wikipedia-is-such.html
>
> Then I stewed. I couldn't stop thinking about how I'd tried to get a
> decent article sorted out again, but I just couldn't seem to get traction.
>
> I originally had taken material from the [[City of Auburn]] article that
> was about the individual. I should have realised it was partisan, and it
> was a bad judgement call. I write done more material, but it was far too
> negative. I guess o didn't see it that way at the time.
>
> I recall I went to bed and the next day I was accused of writing an attack
> article and an admin slapped on not one but two template telling me I was
> about to be blocked. Then I discovered the article had been deleted. Nobody
> had notified me. I couldn't work out what had happened. Then I realised it
> had been deleted.
>
> So I tried again. This time I started from scratch. I started to edit very
> carefully. I started with a paragraph stub which just very, very briefly
> noted Mehajor is a deputy mayor and property developer. I think I wrote a
> short paragraph Bout his wedding which was very notable. It's in the
> history.
>
> Then it was put up for deletion again. In the A7 category. I'm rusty at
> Wikipedia, sure, but what? A7? It was for notability. But, I thought, how?
> The man is highly significant! Not a day goes by without the media talking
> of his exploits!
>
> So I objected. The editor rounded on me. He's famous for being famous,
> like a Kardashian! he said. But I said, he was a deputy mayor and he's been
> in the Australian media extensively! It's not just his wedding (which was
> notorious) - it's his property deals, and his companies, and he got his
> entire council sacked! And he is in court all the time and is under an AFP
> investigation! That *is* notable!
>
> But, I was told, there's not enough In the article. I was referred to
> another acronym about notability. But I know about notability policy, I
> thought. It's about the subject, not the content of the article..,
> desperately I hunted through the policy git the section on this. I'd read
> it before, years ago. If the article was deleted before I got a chance to
> object, I'd be called a troll, or worse. I'd be blocked for recreating it.
> In the nick of time I found the section and objected, and I asked to have
> it put on Articles For Deletion. And I pointed out I was literally editing
> the article when it was almost deleted - because it didn't establish enough
> context. But, I thought, how do you establish context of the article is
> deleted midway through editing it?
>
> The edito

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The end

[Kalliope Tsouroupidou]

Hello Wikimedia-l readers,

Thank you for reaching us about a recent email by Chris.
Just to let you know that we are looking into it, and there is not need to
alert us further.

Thank you very much.

Warm regards,

K.

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Chris Sherlock 
wrote:

>
> I've just been blocked forever. I've been bullied, and I'm having suicidal
> thoughts.
>
> I don't know what to do now.
>
> Right now I'm reaching out to anyone who might listen.  I've been called
> obsessive, someone who attacks people, I've not been listened to and I've
> been lectured on policy by people who quote three letter shortcuts at me
> without reading the policy.
>
> An admin just told me that I had submitted too many kilobytes which
> violated some sort of policy. When I pointed out that half of the kilobytes
> were references I was ignored. When I pointed out that the one reverting me
> was deleting no contentious stuff I was told I was being contentious. When
> I pointed out I had been told I'm not allowed to use primary sources in any
> way and the policy was its ok but to use it with care, and all I was doing
> was checking a company directorship, I was ignored.
>
> I wrote your [[exploding whale]] article. I invented your [citation
> needed] tag. I started your admins noticeboard.
>
> But I'm not well, and nobody on Wikipedia seems to be kind. You are all so
> busy power tripping that you forget there is a real, live person on the
> other side. A person who is wounded. I haven't always been this depressed.
> Not anxious. I stupidly logged into my account yesterday, one that nobody
> knew I used, and tried to edit the Salim Mehajer article. I was surprised
> it wasn't there, but I've never been so obstructed I all my life. It's not
> even that there was a disagreement, it was like I wasn't worth anything. I
> spent hours of my time researching the article, trying to do a good job.
> But in an instant the material was ripped away, and I was called obsessed.
>
> That's not what I was called when I rewrote the [[USA PATRIOT Act]]
> article. People told me it was long, but they were encouraging. My hard
> work was appreciated.
>
> I've never attacked the subject of the article, Salim Mehajer. But when I
> was called obsessive, I guess something broke inside me. I reached badly
> and called the guy who called me obsessive a twit. Then I wrote a bitter
> article and posted it on my blog. You can read it here:
>
>
> http://randomtechnicalstuff.blogspot.com.au/2016/05/dont-bite-newbies-why-wikipedia-is-such.html
>
> Then I stewed. I couldn't stop thinking about how I'd tried to get a
> decent article sorted out again, but I just couldn't seem to get traction.
>
> I originally had taken material from the [[City of Auburn]] article that
> was about the individual. I should have realised it was partisan, and it
> was a bad judgement call. I write done more material, but it was far too
> negative. I guess o didn't see it that way at the time.
>
> I recall I went to bed and the next day I was accused of writing an attack
> article and an admin slapped on not one but two template telling me I was
> about to be blocked. Then I discovered the article had been deleted. Nobody
> had notified me. I couldn't work out what had happened. Then I realised it
> had been deleted.
>
> So I tried again. This time I started from scratch. I started to edit very
> carefully. I started with a paragraph stub which just very, very briefly
> noted Mehajor is a deputy mayor and property developer. I think I wrote a
> short paragraph Bout his wedding which was very notable. It's in the
> history.
>
> Then it was put up for deletion again. In the A7 category. I'm rusty at
> Wikipedia, sure, but what? A7? It was for notability. But, I thought, how?
> The man is highly significant! Not a day goes by without the media talking
> of his exploits!
>
> So I objected. The editor rounded on me. He's famous for being famous,
> like a Kardashian! he said. But I said, he was a deputy mayor and he's been
> in the Australian media extensively! It's not just his wedding (which was
> notorious) - it's his property deals, and his companies, and he got his
> entire council sacked! And he is in court all the time and is under an AFP
> investigation! That *is* notable!
>
> But, I was told, there's not enough In the article. I was referred to
> another acronym about notability. But I know about notability policy, I
> thought. It's about the subject, not the content of the article..,
> desperately I hunted through the policy git the section on this. I'd read
> it before, years ago. If the article was deleted before I got a chance to
> object, I'd be called a troll, or worse. I'd be blocked for recreating it.
> In the nick of time I found the section and objected, and I asked to have
> it put on Articles For Deletion. And I pointed out I was literally editing
> the article when it was almost deleted - because it didn't establish enough
> context. But, I thought, how do you 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The end

[Vi to]

I'm not a regular at the English Wikipedia so I don't have any background
about what did happen to you. I spend a fair amount of my spare time
editing wikis but fuck off the wiki, it's just a virtual world.
All this happened to your virtual identity not to you!

Vito

2016-05-17 14:44 GMT+02:00 Chris Sherlock :

>
> I've just been blocked forever. I've been bullied, and I'm having suicidal
> thoughts.
>
> I don't know what to do now.
>
> Right now I'm reaching out to anyone who might listen.  I've been called
> obsessive, someone who attacks people, I've not been listened to and I've
> been lectured on policy by people who quote three letter shortcuts at me
> without reading the policy.
>
> An admin just told me that I had submitted too many kilobytes which
> violated some sort of policy. When I pointed out that half of the kilobytes
> were references I was ignored. When I pointed out that the one reverting me
> was deleting no contentious stuff I was told I was being contentious. When
> I pointed out I had been told I'm not allowed to use primary sources in any
> way and the policy was its ok but to use it with care, and all I was doing
> was checking a company directorship, I was ignored.
>
> I wrote your [[exploding whale]] article. I invented your [citation
> needed] tag. I started your admins noticeboard.
>
> But I'm not well, and nobody on Wikipedia seems to be kind. You are all so
> busy power tripping that you forget there is a real, live person on the
> other side. A person who is wounded. I haven't always been this depressed.
> Not anxious. I stupidly logged into my account yesterday, one that nobody
> knew I used, and tried to edit the Salim Mehajer article. I was surprised
> it wasn't there, but I've never been so obstructed I all my life. It's not
> even that there was a disagreement, it was like I wasn't worth anything. I
> spent hours of my time researching the article, trying to do a good job.
> But in an instant the material was ripped away, and I was called obsessed.
>
> That's not what I was called when I rewrote the [[USA PATRIOT Act]]
> article. People told me it was long, but they were encouraging. My hard
> work was appreciated.
>
> I've never attacked the subject of the article, Salim Mehajer. But when I
> was called obsessive, I guess something broke inside me. I reached badly
> and called the guy who called me obsessive a twit. Then I wrote a bitter
> article and posted it on my blog. You can read it here:
>
>
> http://randomtechnicalstuff.blogspot.com.au/2016/05/dont-bite-newbies-why-wikipedia-is-such.html
>
> Then I stewed. I couldn't stop thinking about how I'd tried to get a
> decent article sorted out again, but I just couldn't seem to get traction.
>
> I originally had taken material from the [[City of Auburn]] article that
> was about the individual. I should have realised it was partisan, and it
> was a bad judgement call. I write done more material, but it was far too
> negative. I guess o didn't see it that way at the time.
>
> I recall I went to bed and the next day I was accused of writing an attack
> article and an admin slapped on not one but two template telling me I was
> about to be blocked. Then I discovered the article had been deleted. Nobody
> had notified me. I couldn't work out what had happened. Then I realised it
> had been deleted.
>
> So I tried again. This time I started from scratch. I started to edit very
> carefully. I started with a paragraph stub which just very, very briefly
> noted Mehajor is a deputy mayor and property developer. I think I wrote a
> short paragraph Bout his wedding which was very notable. It's in the
> history.
>
> Then it was put up for deletion again. In the A7 category. I'm rusty at
> Wikipedia, sure, but what? A7? It was for notability. But, I thought, how?
> The man is highly significant! Not a day goes by without the media talking
> of his exploits!
>
> So I objected. The editor rounded on me. He's famous for being famous,
> like a Kardashian! he said. But I said, he was a deputy mayor and he's been
> in the Australian media extensively! It's not just his wedding (which was
> notorious) - it's his property deals, and his companies, and he got his
> entire council sacked! And he is in court all the time and is under an AFP
> investigation! That *is* notable!
>
> But, I was told, there's not enough In the article. I was referred to
> another acronym about notability. But I know about notability policy, I
> thought. It's about the subject, not the content of the article..,
> desperately I hunted through the policy git the section on this. I'd read
> it before, years ago. If the article was deleted before I got a chance to
> object, I'd be called a troll, or worse. I'd be blocked for recreating it.
> In the nick of time I found the section and objected, and I asked to have
> it put on Articles For Deletion. And I pointed out I was literally editing
> the article when it was almost deleted - because it didn't establish enough
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The end

[Michel Vuijlsteke]

Welcome to my exact experience on Dutch Wikipedia. Banned for life for
'outing' a power user.

The 'outing' is in huge inverted commas -- (1) enter her on-wiki username
in any search engine and you get oodles of vanity page(s) with her full
name and (2) she'd done much worse than that to me.

I've been called names, articles have been deleted, I've been told by many
people that, sure, were it any other person they'd be banned, and sure,
when she refers people to [Leck mich im Arsch] it *might* be construed as
uncivil, but hey, she's doing good work on vandal patrol and deleting
articles, so...

Yup. It's very, very toxic at times. And nobody really cares.

On 17 May 2016 at 14:47, Pete Forsyth  wrote:

> Reaching out offlist. Anyone who knows Chris well and has helpful input,
> feel free to contact me offlist.
> -Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Chris Sherlock <
> chris.sherloc...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > I've just been blocked forever. I've been bullied, and I'm having
> suicidal
> > thoughts.
> >
> > I don't know what to do now.
> >
> > Right now I'm reaching out to anyone who might listen.  I've been called
> > obsessive, someone who attacks people, I've not been listened to and I've
> > been lectured on policy by people who quote three letter shortcuts at me
> > without reading the policy.
> >
> > An admin just told me that I had submitted too many kilobytes which
> > violated some sort of policy. When I pointed out that half of the
> kilobytes
> > were references I was ignored. When I pointed out that the one reverting
> me
> > was deleting no contentious stuff I was told I was being contentious.
> When
> > I pointed out I had been told I'm not allowed to use primary sources in
> any
> > way and the policy was its ok but to use it with care, and all I was
> doing
> > was checking a company directorship, I was ignored.
> >
> > I wrote your [[exploding whale]] article. I invented your [citation
> > needed] tag. I started your admins noticeboard.
> >
> > But I'm not well, and nobody on Wikipedia seems to be kind. You are all
> so
> > busy power tripping that you forget there is a real, live person on the
> > other side. A person who is wounded. I haven't always been this
> depressed.
> > Not anxious. I stupidly logged into my account yesterday, one that nobody
> > knew I used, and tried to edit the Salim Mehajer article. I was surprised
> > it wasn't there, but I've never been so obstructed I all my life. It's
> not
> > even that there was a disagreement, it was like I wasn't worth anything.
> I
> > spent hours of my time researching the article, trying to do a good job.
> > But in an instant the material was ripped away, and I was called
> obsessed.
> >
> > That's not what I was called when I rewrote the [[USA PATRIOT Act]]
> > article. People told me it was long, but they were encouraging. My hard
> > work was appreciated.
> >
> > I've never attacked the subject of the article, Salim Mehajer. But when I
> > was called obsessive, I guess something broke inside me. I reached badly
> > and called the guy who called me obsessive a twit. Then I wrote a bitter
> > article and posted it on my blog. You can read it here:
> >
> >
> >
> http://randomtechnicalstuff.blogspot.com.au/2016/05/dont-bite-newbies-why-wikipedia-is-such.html
> >
> > Then I stewed. I couldn't stop thinking about how I'd tried to get a
> > decent article sorted out again, but I just couldn't seem to get
> traction.
> >
> > I originally had taken material from the [[City of Auburn]] article that
> > was about the individual. I should have realised it was partisan, and it
> > was a bad judgement call. I write done more material, but it was far too
> > negative. I guess o didn't see it that way at the time.
> >
> > I recall I went to bed and the next day I was accused of writing an
> attack
> > article and an admin slapped on not one but two template telling me I was
> > about to be blocked. Then I discovered the article had been deleted.
> Nobody
> > had notified me. I couldn't work out what had happened. Then I realised
> it
> > had been deleted.
> >
> > So I tried again. This time I started from scratch. I started to edit
> very
> > carefully. I started with a paragraph stub which just very, very briefly
> > noted Mehajor is a deputy mayor and property developer. I think I wrote a
> > short paragraph Bout his wedding which was very notable. It's in the
> > history.
> >
> > Then it was put up for deletion again. In the A7 category. I'm rusty at
> > Wikipedia, sure, but what? A7? It was for notability. But, I thought,
> how?
> > The man is highly significant! Not a day goes by without the media
> talking
> > of his exploits!
> >
> > So I objected. The editor rounded on me. He's famous for being famous,
> > like a Kardashian! he said. But I said, he was a deputy mayor and he's
> been
> > in the Australian media extensively! It's not just his wedding (which was
> > notorious) - it's his property deals, and h

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The end

[Brill Lyle]

I feel really bad for the person who started this thread. I hope and assume
that the WMF response means they have some sort of way to provide support
to someone suffering from ideations of suicide.

In addition to a policy on safe space -- which I know exists and our local
chapter as well as our regular venue have this posted on our namespaces --
I hope that there is documentation and support on this issue as well. If
there isn't one there needs to be. And it should be posted in a position
where it is visible, like the safe space policy.

I've been a member of various online communities, one music mailing list
for 10+ years where we had a person who had very bad PTSD (who eventually
got better) and others who died by suicide, etc. The acting out was a very
difficult situation and one that I have learned to not take lightly. It is
a lot like life, where you don't know what's going on for people, but it
definitely makes me pause a bit in interactions online.

This editor and their editing may be an extreme case, but they are not
alone. I hope they know that from the few responses here.

I have had bad interactions with obstructive, bullying, and Wikipedia rule
tossing folks. When I have started pages I hold my breath and hope that the
work doesn't get deleted -- or even scrutinized harshly. When I feel
passionate about a topic I will try to fight for notability but it's always
dicey. Then I see articles up on Wikipedia that have no business being up
there, have two citations and are paragraphs long, but are not challenged,
subject to the type of scrutiny the new stuff I contribute, etc.

Also, adding content. Good content with citations (I'm obsessed with
citations). Having it deleted. Being told it is too encyclopedic (yes!).
Editors deleting content is a real problem. It just takes one to be an
intransigent jerk and bully or rule throw their way into making the
experience uncooperative. Sigh.

So I tend to have a very long list of stuff I want to work on, much of it
in dustier corners of Wikipedia. Thankfully my attention wanders and if a
page heats up, I unfollow and try to walk away and refocus Sometimes I
can do that. I had to do that for Louis C.K.'s TV show Horace and Pete (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horace_and_Pete) because the editing became
super unpleasant.

Then as a counterbalance

There are times like the collective editing to improve the page on the
Reverend Clem Pinckney (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clementa_C._Pinckney),
who was killed in South Carolina during a prayer group by a white
supremacist, and the collective creation of a page on the setting of that
tragedy, a Wikipedia entry on the church, Mother Emanuel (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emanuel_African_Methodist_Episcopal_Church),
that was long overdue for an article due to its historical importance in
the African-American community. And a few other times when I've edited with
other editors, learned stuff, just enjoyed geeking out with another person
passionate about making Wikipedia better and more representative of the
world we live in.

I would love to do more cooperative editing. Most of the editathons we help
out with here in NYC focus on the new editor. I think we all have a lot to
offer each other, folks who have been adding content for a while and are
passionate about that. I wish we did a better job supporting each other.

Best,

- Erika




*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC


On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Michel Vuijlsteke 
wrote:

> Welcome to my exact experience on Dutch Wikipedia. Banned for life for
> 'outing' a power user.
>
> The 'outing' is in huge inverted commas -- (1) enter her on-wiki username
> in any search engine and you get oodles of vanity page(s) with her full
> name and (2) she'd done much worse than that to me.
>
> I've been called names, articles have been deleted, I've been told by many
> people that, sure, were it any other person they'd be banned, and sure,
> when she refers people to [Leck mich im Arsch] it *might* be construed as
> uncivil, but hey, she's doing good work on vandal patrol and deleting
> articles, so...
>
> Yup. It's very, very toxic at times. And nobody really cares.
>
> On 17 May 2016 at 14:47, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
>
> > Reaching out offlist. Anyone who knows Chris well and has helpful input,
> > feel free to contact me offlist.
> > -Pete
> > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> >
> > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Chris Sherlock <
> > chris.sherloc...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I've just been blocked forever. I've been bullied, and I'm having
> > suicidal
> > > thoughts.
> > >
> > > I don't know what to do now.
> > >
> > > Right now I'm reaching out to anyone who might listen.  I've been
> called
> > > obsessive, someone who attacks people, I've not been listened to and
> I've
> > > been lectured on policy by people who quote three let

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The end

[Richard Symonds]

Hi all,

I wonder if that's the time to end the thread now (which is on a very
public list) and let people reach out privately. Discussion of this sort of
topic, especially when a specific person is involved, is not ideal, and
could make things worse.

New threads would be best for any more tangentially-related discussions, I
think.

Richard Symonds
Wikimedia UK
0207 065 0992

Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).

*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control
over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*

On 17 May 2016 at 15:58, Brill Lyle  wrote:

> I feel really bad for the person who started this thread. I hope and assume
> that the WMF response means they have some sort of way to provide support
> to someone suffering from ideations of suicide.
>
> In addition to a policy on safe space -- which I know exists and our local
> chapter as well as our regular venue have this posted on our namespaces --
> I hope that there is documentation and support on this issue as well. If
> there isn't one there needs to be. And it should be posted in a position
> where it is visible, like the safe space policy.
>
> I've been a member of various online communities, one music mailing list
> for 10+ years where we had a person who had very bad PTSD (who eventually
> got better) and others who died by suicide, etc. The acting out was a very
> difficult situation and one that I have learned to not take lightly. It is
> a lot like life, where you don't know what's going on for people, but it
> definitely makes me pause a bit in interactions online.
>
> This editor and their editing may be an extreme case, but they are not
> alone. I hope they know that from the few responses here.
>
> I have had bad interactions with obstructive, bullying, and Wikipedia rule
> tossing folks. When I have started pages I hold my breath and hope that the
> work doesn't get deleted -- or even scrutinized harshly. When I feel
> passionate about a topic I will try to fight for notability but it's always
> dicey. Then I see articles up on Wikipedia that have no business being up
> there, have two citations and are paragraphs long, but are not challenged,
> subject to the type of scrutiny the new stuff I contribute, etc.
>
> Also, adding content. Good content with citations (I'm obsessed with
> citations). Having it deleted. Being told it is too encyclopedic (yes!).
> Editors deleting content is a real problem. It just takes one to be an
> intransigent jerk and bully or rule throw their way into making the
> experience uncooperative. Sigh.
>
> So I tend to have a very long list of stuff I want to work on, much of it
> in dustier corners of Wikipedia. Thankfully my attention wanders and if a
> page heats up, I unfollow and try to walk away and refocus Sometimes I
> can do that. I had to do that for Louis C.K.'s TV show Horace and Pete (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horace_and_Pete) because the editing became
> super unpleasant.
>
> Then as a counterbalance
>
> There are times like the collective editing to improve the page on the
> Reverend Clem Pinckney (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clementa_C._Pinckney
> ),
> who was killed in South Carolina during a prayer group by a white
> supremacist, and the collective creation of a page on the setting of that
> tragedy, a Wikipedia entry on the church, Mother Emanuel (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emanuel_African_Methodist_Episcopal_Church),
> that was long overdue for an article due to its historical importance in
> the African-American community. And a few other times when I've edited with
> other editors, learned stuff, just enjoyed geeking out with another person
> passionate about making Wikipedia better and more representative of the
> world we live in.
>
> I would love to do more cooperative editing. Most of the editathons we help
> out with here in NYC focus on the new editor. I think we all have a lot to
> offer each other, folks who have been adding content for a while and are
> passionate about that. I wish we did a better job supporting each other.
>
> Best,
>
> - Erika
>
>
>
>
> *Erika Herzog*
> Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
> Secretary, Wikimedia NYC
> 
>
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Michel Vuijlsteke 
> wrote:
>
> > Welcome to my exact experience on Dutch Wikipedia. Banned for life for
> > 'outing' a power user.
> >
> > The 'outing' is in huge inverted commas -- (1) enter her on-wiki username
> > in any search engine and you get oodles of vanity page(s) with her full
> > name and 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The end

[Tim Starling]

On 18/05/16 01:18, Richard Symonds wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I wonder if that's the time to end the thread now (which is on a very
> public list) and let people reach out privately. Discussion of this sort of
> topic, especially when a specific person is involved, is not ideal, and
> could make things worse.

Fair enough. But for the benefit of concerned readers, I think it's
appropriate to relay the news from Facebook this morning (AEST) that
Chris is OK, he is feeling better.

Also, I've heard that the WMF response last night was appropriate and
treated the matter with all due seriousness.

-- Tim Starling


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Announcing Rapid Grants

[Alex Wang]

Hello Wikimedians,

We are excited to announce the launch of a new Wikimedia Foundation grants
program, Rapid Grants!

Rapid grants fund Wikimedia community members -- individuals, groups, or
organizations contributing to Wikimedia projects -- to organize projects
throughout the year for up to USD 2,000. Projects can include experiments
or standard needs that don't need broad review to get started. Applications
are reviewed weekly by WMF staff.

Read more about the new program and apply here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Rapid

Questions? Email rapidgra...@wikimedia.org

For more information about next steps and important dates for the grants
program redesign, please visit:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Reimagining_WMF_grants/Implementation

Cheers,

Alex

-- 
Alexandra Wang
Program Officer
Community Resources
Wikimedia Foundation 
+1 415-839-6885
Skype: alexvwang
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The end

[Isla Haddow-Flood]

That's good to hear Tim. Really feel for Chris and what he is going though.

Thank you so much for letting us all know!

On 18 May 2016 at 02:15, Tim Starling  wrote:

> On 18/05/16 01:18, Richard Symonds wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I wonder if that's the time to end the thread now (which is on a very
> > public list) and let people reach out privately. Discussion of this sort
> of
> > topic, especially when a specific person is involved, is not ideal, and
> > could make things worse.
>
> Fair enough. But for the benefit of concerned readers, I think it's
> appropriate to relay the news from Facebook this morning (AEST) that
> Chris is OK, he is feeling better.
>
> Also, I've heard that the WMF response last night was appropriate and
> treated the matter with all due seriousness.
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Isla Haddow-Flood
skype: islahaddow
twitter: @havingaflood
instgram:   islig
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Islahaddow
Linked in:  http://za.linkedin.com/pub/isla-haddow-flood
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,