3 ms·

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

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 4y 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 4y 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 4y ago
    Lol, “he was accused by many” is just smearing. Good that it was removed.
    - Jiro 4y 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 4y 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 4y 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.
        morsch 4y ago
        Well, you quoted an exact phrasing and said it was routine. All of the things you mention on the Trump page are appear to be links to expanded parts of the article that go into greater detail (including, crucially, references). It's not a violation of WP:WEASEL which I wouldn't expect any how on such a high profile article. You're of course right that weaselly language exists on Wikipedia, otherwise there wouldn't be a need for an editorial policy. It's a process.
        4y ago

mistrial9 4y 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 4y 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 4y ago
  Lol, “he was accused by many” is just smearing. Good that it was removed.
  - Jiro 4y 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 4y 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 4y 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.
        morsch 4y ago
        Well, you quoted an exact phrasing and said it was routine. All of the things you mention on the Trump page are appear to be links to expanded parts of the article that go into greater detail (including, crucially, references). It's not a violation of WP:WEASEL which I wouldn't expect any how on such a high profile article. You're of course right that weaselly language exists on Wikipedia, otherwise there wouldn't be a need for an editorial policy. It's a process.
        4y ago