Page 1 of 1

Whois wbm1058

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2022 2:25 am
by wexter
search.php?keywords=wbm1058&fid%5B0%5D=19
wbm1058 apparently wants a living wage from the Foundation, or at least a budget to pay his allocated workforce from the brown countries.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wbm1058
I'm puzzled by these responses. I did provide a citation. Facebook is not a reliable source. Wikipedia's unreliability is a problem. And other datasets you would expect to be highly reliable aren't either, so Wikipedia is not an outlier in that regard. Especially since we use some of those data sources as "reliable sources". Society as a whole perhaps doesn't value accuracy as much as it should, and indeed Wikipedia editors should strive for a higher level of accuracy. On the other hand, it's not possible to perfectly know everything (like next week's weather or the exact date someone was born), and in those cases we settle for the best approximation. Wbm1058 (talk) 01:44, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Re: Whois wbm1058

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2022 5:23 am
by ericbarbour
Short answer:

He/she/it/? is a classic stupid noticeboard pest. Probably a middle-aged white male. Has been messing around on WP for more than 10 years, passed an asslicking RFA in 2015, despite numerous complaints about lack of content authoring. The fool tried to run for Arbcom the year before. And failed horribly. One of those little shits who WOULD go around parroting WP:RELIABLE, WP:NOTHERE, etc.

Clearly an IT nerd, judging from the early "work", and obsession with this absurdly long and crappy list. Heavy user of bots to grind content and inflate contributions without doing much real useful labor. I suspect he writes his own bots. See his Phabricator page to laugh at his pathetic begging for bot rights.

Otherwise I cannot be bothered with this clue-free minor member of the "cult". Barely mentioned in the book wiki, and no one else notices him either. Useless meatsack---like many other "active admins" today.