Difference between revisions of "Wikipedia/System gamers"
(→Example system-gaming accounts: Supreme Deliciousness) |
(→Theory vs Practise: example) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
==Theory vs Practise== | ==Theory vs Practise== | ||
| − | The [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Gaming_the_system Wikipedia:Gaming the system] article (and all the links from it) provide an online tutorial for anyone wishing to censor an article or push their own point of view (as if the inbuilt bias of Wikipedia wasn't enough on its own). | + | The [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Gaming_the_system Wikipedia:Gaming the system] article (and all the links from it) provide an online tutorial for anyone wishing to censor an article or push their own point of view (as if the inbuilt bias of Wikipedia wasn't enough on its own). Theoretically, there are "''systems in place''" to deal with system-gamers though, in practise, they are totally ineffective ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bdell555#Hi an example]). |
The contributions to "Talk" pages are especially rich in possible content because this is where non-mainstream views are often censored by the system-gamers. | The contributions to "Talk" pages are especially rich in possible content because this is where non-mainstream views are often censored by the system-gamers. | ||
Revision as of 09:36, 12 September 2014
 Wikipedia/System gamers  | |
|---|---|
| Interest of | Wikiscanner |
| Wikipedia accounts used to manipulate content. | |
This page is a research tool for WikiSpooks editors. The activities of certain WikiPedia accounts give some real clues about what the establishment/commercially-controlled media wants and does not want to be publicised.
Contents
Wikipedia definition
Gaming the system means deliberately using Wikipedia policies and guidelines in bad faith to thwart the aims of Wikipedia. Gaming the system may represent an abuse of process, disruptive editing, or otherwise evading the spirit of community consensus. Editors typically game the system to make a point, to further an edit war, or to enforce a specific non-neutral point of view.
If an editor finds a loophole or trick that allows them to evade community standards or misuse administrator tools, it should not be treated the same as a good faith mistake. However, Wikipedia sanctions are meant to be preventative, not punitive. A warning from an administrator is usually the best way to prevent gaming, because a clear warning should help correct both good faith mistakes and bad faith games. If an editor ignores a warning and repeats their behavior, or if they find new creative ways to achieve the same disruption, it is more likely that they are gaming the system in bad faith.[1]
Theory vs Practise
The Wikipedia:Gaming the system article (and all the links from it) provide an online tutorial for anyone wishing to censor an article or push their own point of view (as if the inbuilt bias of Wikipedia wasn't enough on its own). Theoretically, there are "systems in place" to deal with system-gamers though, in practise, they are totally ineffective (an example).
The contributions to "Talk" pages are especially rich in possible content because this is where non-mainstream views are often censored by the system-gamers.
Example system-gaming accounts
An account does not necessarily represent a particular person or persons. Wikipedia accounts are anonymous and so any particular account may have input from more than one person or one individual may use more than one account. Consequently, the table below is not a value-judgement on a particular person but on the way an account behaves.
| Account | Interests include | Level |
|---|---|---|
| Bdell555 | Russia, Ukraine | 5 |
| Volunteer Marek | Russia, Ukraine | 5 |
| Sayerslle | Russia, Ukraine, Syria | 4 |
| Kudzu1 | Russia, Ukraine, Syria | 4 |
| Geogene | Russia, Ukraine | 3 |
| Stickee | Russia, Ukraine | 3 |
| Supreme Deliciousness | Syria | 3 |
| My very best wishes | Russia, Ukraine | 2 |
| Martinevans123 | MH17 | 1 |
