Blocked from Editing Wikipedia. For ‘Negative Media Scrutiny’ (over Child Protection) and ‘Satirical Animated GIF’s

A while back I created a sub-reddit called the Great Work. I proposed we work with Wikipedia in good faith. Earlier today I opened an arbitration request about Mark Bernstein’s desire to refer to GamerGate as ‘terrorism’. I got blocked. This, in their own words, is why (archive here) –

“So far, Vordak’s contribution to Wikipedia has been to leave a series of messages which demand that editors and administrators take his preferred actions or face negative media scrutiny, promote his blog via [[User talk:Jimbo Wales]] and Reddit (which has long been a brigading station for Wikipedia edits in this topic area), prominently mention the subject of his complaint in a long blog post about pedophilia while claiming he had absolutely no intention of linking him to such a thing, and running a contest “for the best satirical animated GIF connecting Wikipedia and Paedophilia.” At the conclusion of this matter I will be blocking Vordak as WP:NOTHERE unless he is blocked by the Committee or I am advised by a member of the Committee not to take this action. Gamaliel 17:11, 18 July 2015 (UTC)”

It is true that I said in emails and posts that (for example) if paedophilia is not dealt with then there would be negative media scrutiny. It is also true that I engaged in ‘satire’. At least I have been blocked for something I have done. Gamaliel went on –

“For the record, I support any ethically-sound journalistic, legal, and on-wiki efforts to expose any harmful actions by pedophiles. I do not support prominently mentioning completely unrelated parties in allegedly journalistic efforts that are supposedly about pedophilia but really about your personal agenda, as I find that ethically repugnant.”

This is plainly mendacious. There can be no on-wiki attempts whatsoever to expose paedophiles because the Wikipedia Child Protection policy mandates an immediate, permanent ban for doing any such thing. Gamaliel has been an administrator of Wikipedia since before the policy existed – he knows what it says.

“[…] You should raise your concerns only by email; questions or accusations directed against a particular editor in project space may result in a block for the editor who posted them […]”

I see no reason to appeal. I do not wish to donate my time to Wikipedia.

A while back I said that we should try to engage openly and in good faith with Wikipedia. This has clearly failed. Good faith remains – but no longer with any accommodation for Wikipedia’s unreasonable policies. I am now free to name Wikipedia editors where there is public interest and / or to take legal action if I wish.

[Ethics Update 19/07/2015]

I have seen comment that in fact it was administrator Floquenbeam who blocked my account and I have been insufficiently clear. Whilst this is noted he was only following on from Gamaliel’s intent and shaving off a couple of days so whilst I am happy to clarify it makes little difference. Gamaliel is of interest because he is protecting Mark Bernstein and other administrators follow his lead.

Share Button

5 thoughts on “Blocked from Editing Wikipedia. For ‘Negative Media Scrutiny’ (over Child Protection) and ‘Satirical Animated GIF’s

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *