Received this morning from Kathryn Cramer:
I think I’ve just gotten the ultimate comment to my Wikipedia User talk page. If I can figure out the formatting, I’ll frame it. The commentor (an admin and a Wikimedia intern) argues that I have never been nominated for a Hugo on the grounds that the nomination was for NYRSF.Let us despair: Swatjester is indeed a Wikipedia Administrator. He’s very active. As of this writing, I count 4,882 “User Contributions” of his for this year alone. His run-in with Kathryn isn’t an isolated case. For instance, here you can see him peremptorily telling another user, “Please do not revert my edits. The Vietnam war was not “lost” as there was no declaration of war. Please stop adding in POV items.”
Here it is in its full perfection, Wikipedian self-satisfied ignorance at its highest purity:About WikipediaI was trying, as politely as possible, to explain him that he knew nothing about either Hugo rules or pre-web hypertext (he’s nominated the Eastgate Systems entry for deletion), and so should back down on his wikipedian boldness.
I’ve noticed something about the past couple of conversations we have had. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Nobody needs any special knowledge, or special position, any qualifications to edit. It’s not helpful to demand that other editors present their credentials or show their knowledge, to edit an article. It would be appreciated if you no longer did that again. ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 02:15, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
p.s.: Note also that Wikipedia has no entry for Complacency, and that the WP entry on Ignorance covers Willful Ignorance, but not Self-satisfied Ignorance. (The closest they come is the enty Avidya (Buddhism): “Avidyā is a lack of knowing, and can be associated with intention.”
It seems to me that the situation needs to be corrected.
==Here I am!==He was all over the place in Talk: Greenpeace, where he argued doggedly that Greenpeace is too a terrorist organization; and he took it upon himself, in the main article, to change mentions of “Greenpeace representatives” to “Greenpeace agents.”
I’ve got some experience in the field of counter-terrorism. I’m taking it upon myself to clean up this page, as it absolutely reeks of kiddies playing too much Counter-strike.
Swatjester has continued as he began. He’s downright bellicose about credentials any time he thinks he has them. When he has none and is arguing with an expert in her field, he’s equally insistent that citing credentials, or expecting them to be taken into account, is grossly inappropriate. Wikipedia has responded to this astounding buffoon by clasping him to its institutional bosom. As it says in the opening paragraph of Swatjester’s user profile:
I am a legal intern for the Wikimedia Foundation, a member of the Communications Committee, an OTRS representative on the legal queue, and an English Wikipedia administrator. I also edit Wikiversity, Meta, Wikimedia Commons, and sometimes Wikisource.It would be nice to believe that Swatjester’s comment is the acme of Wikipedian self-satisfied ignorance. If we find a worse one, Kathryn can frame that too.
Addenda: Kathryn from Sunnyvale has requested a list of our stories about Wikipedia. If anyone remembers a piece we’ve omitted, let us know.
Making Light, 05 May 2007: Grep that spool (TNH).Note that every one of them is anonymous. It’s enough to make you think there might be problems inherent in giving people power without responsibility.(Idiot in question: Initially: earless busybody Azer Red, who’s big on tone complaints and deletions. Later: mendacious troll Will BeBack. He was so mortified at having his Wikipedia pseud linked to his real identity that he organized a campaign against Making Light, calling it an “attack site,” and vandalizing unrelated Wikipedia articles that contained links to material at ML.)Sidelights, 02 July 2007: Wikipedia: still run by horse’s asses who think print is magic (PNH). Note: that discussion at Talk: Fred Saberhagen has since been archived. Link was via John Scalzi’s Whatever, same date: Fred Saberhagen Is Dead, But Not on Wikipedia.(Idiot in question: the invincibly ignorant Quatloo.)Making Light, 24 July 2007: Gaming Wikipedia (PNH).(Idiots in question: this gets complicated, but the chief culprit is clearly the vile Hayden5650, a racist nazi homophobe and known Wikipedia vandal. Significant contributory idiocy was provided by Dmcdevit and a complete and utter airhead who signs herself “Alison :)”.)Particles, 03 August 2007: Another way to game Wikipedia (TNH).(Not quite the idiot in question: Professor Luca de Alfaro, who wants to color-code the reputability of Wikipedia contributions. How? If an author’s contributions go unchanged, their reputation rises. If their material is reverted to a prior version, their reputation falls. Problems with this system are left as an exercise for the reader.)Making Light, 13 August 2007: From correspondence: Top this! (TNH).(Idiot in question: Swatjester, of course.)