Page 19 of 35
Re: Paid Editing
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2019 2:31 am
by ericbarbour
I will bet you at least $100 that
Sylvanniss is either a sock operated by a professional paid editor, or an employee of Kik. The account was used for only
three days in August 2016, to edit a random seeming set of articles.....and then greatly expanded
Ted Livingston. Turning it into another useless wiki internet-hero hagiography. And then Sylvanniss disappeared.
Yes, Kik tended to be used by teenagers. And pedophiles. That little item is not mentioned in Livingston's BLP.
It's a bit difficult to ignore...
https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/24/tech/kik ... index.html
Re: Paid Editing
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2019 3:06 am
by ericbarbour
Damn....I seriously have to wonder if
Babel41 isn't Canadian draft-resisting political figure Mark Satin, or a close friend....
https://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo/ ... Mark_Satinhttps://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo/ ... l_centrism
Re: Paid Editing
Posted: Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:35 pm
by ericbarbour
Gosh, Batman! I forgot to mention
Charles Harder!
Isn't it "interesting" that his article looks amazingly like the
personal bio on his website.
Plus, examine the considerable "positive" work done on this item by a succession of "questionable accounts". Only two years old and it's already "grown and shrunk" a couple of times. It must be costly to heel Wikipedia if you're the world's meanest lawyer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Wikieditor4956https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Msilverman41415https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mikepaul411https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Wikicontributor90212
Re: Paid Editing
Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:53 am
by Carrite
Looks at a glance like selective cleansing to eliminate various references to his clients Harvey Weinstein and Donald Trump.
RfB
Re: Paid Editing
Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 1:45 am
by JuiceBeetle
WOW
All 4 Single-Puprose-Accounts (SPAs), almost only editing
Charles_Harder.
The edit comments:
"Removed because content...", "Deleted content because..."
"Add additional information", "Add a statement...", "Added a citation", "Added dates...", Added..., Added..., Added..., "Added an image"
"Edited for clarity", "Made overarching change" (lol), "Edits were made", "Correcting existing information"
These goofy edit comments are obviously the same person.
They are not blocked yet???
The behavioral evidence is clear, even without CU.
A CU would probably reveal a few more socks, though.
Re: Paid Editing
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 3:45 am
by ericbarbour
I wish someone would ask
Jay Paul who
EdwardX and
Jooojay are. They both spend loads of time making nice content about prominent rich people.
In this case, they wrote nearly all the content about Paul and his real-estate company. No one said "boo".
Re: Paid Editing
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 4:04 am
by JuiceBeetle
ericbarbour wrote:No one said "boo".
I presume the reason for that is they have "supportive" admin friends. For a nice share of the payments, it should be easy to find a few jobless admins who appreciate some "donations".
When I have some time I'll look into their interactions to find those connections.
Re: Paid Editing
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:11 am
by ericbarbour
Go for it. Here's another one: reeks of pay-editing, largest contributor was the notorious BrillLyle. Have YOU ever heard of this guy?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_Blasberg
Re: Paid Editing on WP is permissible
Posted: Fri Dec 06, 2019 3:12 am
by ericbarbour
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FranheartsuCould NOT be more obviously a working-for-pay WP editor. The primary author of these.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephanie_Koreyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Rubioand a contributor to the article about Korey and Rubio's company (originally created by TonyTheTiger, which might indicate that HE is performing paid edits):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Away_(luggage)
Mentioned because Away has been the focus of a recent employee-abuse shitshow (read it, it's dark but hilarious)
https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/5/2099 ... -inclusionhttps://www.inc.com/christine-lagorio-c ... eport.htmlDo a websearch for photos of Korey and Rubio. You cannot escape the smell of raging egomania.
Re: Paid Editing on WP is permissible
Posted: Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:29 am
by ericbarbour
It's a bit rare to see a COI-editing story on Slate.....
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/201 ... ditor.html
While both the edit logs and the original Peter Buttigieg page itself are hidden from the average Wikipedia user (as is the case with all deleted pages), a Wikipedia admin who requested anonymity to avoid blowback shared that deleted content with Slate.
Hmmm.
The best part is the abuse she's taking in the comments. This is why people can get away with COI editing--WIKIPEDIA IS MAGIC. And no one, not even an award-winning journalist, is allowed to say otherwise.
Perhaps I should email her. Eh?