3 ms·

most recent experience of the "wall of NO EDIT" for me was two months ago.. I found documents pertaining to a living US Federal Judge who was involved in collus

most recent experience of the "wall of NO EDIT" for me was two months ago.. I found documents pertaining to a living US Federal Judge who was involved in collusion with a local attorney and law enforcement. Formal review did find misconduct, and it was published. The subject area was something I care about. I went to the chat channel of admins and said "I am about to edit this Federal Judge's wikipedia page" .. and showed the evidence. No, no, no was what I got back.. even with the documents plainly visible, in hand, with references. Obviously this is serious since it is a living man, but so are the topics. The Judge has three "fluff" paragraphs about his excellent qualifications, degrees and the names of the courts he has run. Isn't real world evidence enough? yes, they did want media substantiation of the formal reprimands, btw.. I have not made the edits.

KarlKemp 5y ago
This story would be a lot more useful/believable if you included the judge's name. And maybe what "chat channel of admins" you're talking about, because I have 170,000 across wikipedia sites and have no idea what that is supposed to be.
- mistrial9 5y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_B._Shubb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_B._Shubb edit sorry, not at all the topic (I did not make that edit linked below; did not know about it). As stated above, I have documented reprimand in print, and now I also have a media reference too.. here you go https://www.amazon.com/Scorched-Worth-Destruction-Government-Corruption/dp/159403981X https://www.amazon.com/Scorched-Worth-Destruction-Government...
  - KarlKemp 5y ago
    Well, I guess https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=William_B._Shubb&diff=527922741&oldid=527912173&diffmode=source https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=William_B._Shubb&... is the issue? It shouldn't be surprising that accusing someone of being a homophobe would require a reference.
    - LudwigNagasena 5y ago
      Lol, “he was accused by many” is just smearing. Good that it was removed.
      - Jiro 5y ago
        "He was accused by many" is routine in other Wikipedia articles and is one of the ways experienced Wikipedians learn to sneak bias into articles.
        morsch 5y ago
        So routine that the phrase occurs 29 times in the English Wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=%22was+accused+by+many%22&title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&fulltext=1&ns0=1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=%22was+accused... Using such language is against editorial policy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WEASEL https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WEASEL
        Jiro 5y ago
        The exact phrase appears few times, but similar things abound. The first one I tried is the Donald Trump article, which for obvious reasons I'd expect this sort of weaseling in. I wasn't disappointed. "Trump's election and policies sparked numerous protests. Trump made many false and misleading statements during his campaigns and presidency, to a degree unprecedented in American politics, and promoted conspiracy theories. Many of his comments and actions have been characterized as racially charged or racist, and many as misogynistic." That's one "numerous" and three "many" in a small space, along with the weasel wording "many have characterized", which is just like "accused by many"--it's used because Wikipedia wishes to imply that the accusations/characterizations are true without saying so explicitly. Actual information would be something like "Trump made 500 misogynistic statements over his lifetime, but three similar politicians only made 100". Except for the little problem that such data doesn't exist. So the article claims that he made "many" statements. This is of course trivially true.
stereo 5y ago
Which judge, which misconduct?

KarlKemp 5y ago

This story would be a lot more useful/believable if you included the judge's name. And maybe what "chat channel of admins" you're talking about, because I have 170,000 across wikipedia sites and have no idea what that is supposed to be.

mistrial9 5y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_B._Shubb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_B._Shubb edit sorry, not at all the topic (I did not make that edit linked below; did not know about it). As stated above, I have documented reprimand in print, and now I also have a media reference too.. here you go https://www.amazon.com/Scorched-Worth-Destruction-Government-Corruption/dp/159403981X https://www.amazon.com/Scorched-Worth-Destruction-Government...
- KarlKemp 5y ago
  Well, I guess https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=William_B._Shubb&diff=527922741&oldid=527912173&diffmode=source https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=William_B._Shubb&... is the issue? It shouldn't be surprising that accusing someone of being a homophobe would require a reference.
  - LudwigNagasena 5y ago
    Lol, “he was accused by many” is just smearing. Good that it was removed.
    - Jiro 5y ago
      "He was accused by many" is routine in other Wikipedia articles and is one of the ways experienced Wikipedians learn to sneak bias into articles.
      - morsch 5y ago
        So routine that the phrase occurs 29 times in the English Wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=%22was+accused+by+many%22&title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&fulltext=1&ns0=1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=%22was+accused... Using such language is against editorial policy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WEASEL https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WEASEL
        Jiro 5y ago
        The exact phrase appears few times, but similar things abound. The first one I tried is the Donald Trump article, which for obvious reasons I'd expect this sort of weaseling in. I wasn't disappointed. "Trump's election and policies sparked numerous protests. Trump made many false and misleading statements during his campaigns and presidency, to a degree unprecedented in American politics, and promoted conspiracy theories. Many of his comments and actions have been characterized as racially charged or racist, and many as misogynistic." That's one "numerous" and three "many" in a small space, along with the weasel wording "many have characterized", which is just like "accused by many"--it's used because Wikipedia wishes to imply that the accusations/characterizations are true without saying so explicitly. Actual information would be something like "Trump made 500 misogynistic statements over his lifetime, but three similar politicians only made 100". Except for the little problem that such data doesn't exist. So the article claims that he made "many" statements. This is of course trivially true.

stereo 5y ago

Which judge, which misconduct?