Those overreaching blocking-trolls on wikipedia

[mmmxx 12]

I wonder why it is that there are so many blocking-trolls on wikipedia.

 

They ban whole ranges of addresses for 5 years or more. This is ridiculous. Wikipedia really is a low quality site by now.

[LZ1 672]

Hello!

 

Maybe it's the "cheapest" way of handling their issues. As I understand it, they're quite in need of money, judging by the banner ads you sometimes get when you visit .

[mmmxx 12]

Cheap for THEM, maybe. It gives WP a worse name than it already has.

 

Plus they have the nag screen which the adblockers still can't cope with seemingly...  ;-)

[OpenSourcerer 1435]

Curious, I never experienced Wikipedia banning someone from reading articles.. from editing yes, but I see it as a way of self-defense. In those four years you mentioned Wikipedia saw articles of things that never existed in the entire history. Also, there are the sockpuppets, or accounts with the sole purpose of biased editing. Locking out VPN addresses of editing articles is expected to make those easier to identify.

 

Yes, you will say they will find another VPN, or another way, but they are forced to look for these ways. You cannot completely avoid it, you can only make it less affordable, more difficult or both.

[Staff 9972]

Also please note that registered accounts are not blocked from VPN servers, at least according to one of our staff recent experience.

 

Protection of identity when writing an article, or even a single sentence of an article, can be important in various situations and environments. The weight for an article credibility in an encyclopedia lies (in most cases) much more on the verifiable external references than on the IP address of the writer of those references.

 

Kind regards

[mmmxx 12]

Also, there are the sockpuppets, or accounts with the sole purpose of biased editing. Locking out VPN addresses of editing articles is expected to make those easier to identify.

 

In all crucial areas, wp sockpuppets still roam freely and indeed plentiful. I wonder whether they significantly "unbiased" wikipedia by their unjustified, wholesale blocking campaign. 

 

There just is no verifiable proof that their claims are anywhere near truthful. And they are unwilling to discuss it in IRC. So I don't believe them.

[mmmxx 12]

Also please note that registered accounts are not blocked from VPN servers, at least according to one of our staff recent experience.

 

But only AFTER they were registered, I guess. Blocked addresses cannot even register while on a blocked address, of which there are many (e.g. many from Hong Kong).

[mmmxx 12]

This unfairly diminishes participation in a top 50 site by people from Hong Kong. Don't call it racism though ...   ;-)

[mmmxx 12]

 they're quite in need of money, judging by the banner ads 

 

well, here is the ad blocker answer:

 

https://userstyles.org/styles/78456/remove-wikipedia-fundraising-banner

 

 

would have donated, but they banned me due to my IP-address... 

[mmmxx 12]

if ya don't know how to mod css and you want

some tweax done post a pic up of what ya want removed

 

 

well, that's a great offer of yours!

 

https://userstyles.org/styles/78456/remove-wikipedia-fundraising-banner

 

is there but does not work with the latest ad which WPed runs.

 

 

Could you tweak it such that the latest ad banner by wikipedia is removed ? It is quite a bad distraction, and as long as Wikipedia is so obscenely biased und unfair I will never even consider to donate.  greetz out!

[cm0s 118]

i'm tellen ya, userstyles dot org really messed their site up, not sayen that to just complain, they really goofed up a good thing

[OpenSourcerer 1435]

What exactly is the point in not writing it like a true URL?

 

@rndm aka cm0s, I removed the link as you requested, even if you made a drama tape of it once again. I appreciate your fandom of my glorious name.

[mmmxx 12]

this was the link i posted you forgot the 'dot html'

 

or anyone else: cm0s dot co/wikiz dot html

 

i tried to find the banner ad couldn't please post a link that shows the banner

i'll take a look at it post back here

thanx

 

cm0s

the banner should show up after 2 minutes or so with all blockers disabled. That is, unless they stopped the campaign due to public outrage...   ;-)

[OpenSourcerer 1435]

pulled my site down sent staff a trouble ticket also

 

ya got no right man to do that i'll cancel my site

 

You sent a trouble ticket to AirVPN Support, that's wise and totally the right thing to do. Thankfully, you also wrote me a personal mail which should be the preferred way of handling this. I received your mail and deleted the link. Easy as that. I even ran a search on a few search engines to verify that your content has not been indexed in the short time span the link was available.

 

Let me give you some advice for the future: If you don't want people to link to your site, write a goddamn paragraph and display it in an iframe or something. You didn't ask your visitors to not create links to any content on this website, so the standard rules apply: I may link to it if I can access it.

 

Good luck with the TOR thing. You seem to be accustomed to having no visitors, I wonder what the point is in having a webserver with stuff no one reads... oh well. Your party.

/ig. For eternity.

[mmmxx 12]

cm0s

 

I've used your wikipedia style, it is quite nice. Maybe you should place some marks "CUT TEXT BELOW"  ... "COPY & PASTE TEXT ABOVE"  so ppl won't have to fiddle around though its not that difficult.

[mmmxx 12]

Blocking whole subnets for 5+ years clearly is being used as a political tool on wikipedia to censor contributions by new editors.

 

 

WP already has an abysmal reputation as being politically censored, and proof is so easy to find. Try discussing THAT on WP!              

 

 

Guess why you won't be able to!