Hi all,

I wonder if that's the time to end the thread now (which is on a very
public list) and let people reach out privately. Discussion of this sort of
topic, especially when a specific person is involved, is not ideal, and
could make things worse.

New threads would be best for any more tangentially-related discussions, I
think.

Richard Symonds
Wikimedia UK
0207 065 0992

Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).

*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control
over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*

On 17 May 2016 at 15:58, Brill Lyle <wp.brilll...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I feel really bad for the person who started this thread. I hope and assume
> that the WMF response means they have some sort of way to provide support
> to someone suffering from ideations of suicide.
>
> In addition to a policy on safe space -- which I know exists and our local
> chapter as well as our regular venue have this posted on our namespaces --
> I hope that there is documentation and support on this issue as well. If
> there isn't one there needs to be. And it should be posted in a position
> where it is visible, like the safe space policy.
>
> I've been a member of various online communities, one music mailing list
> for 10+ years where we had a person who had very bad PTSD (who eventually
> got better) and others who died by suicide, etc. The acting out was a very
> difficult situation and one that I have learned to not take lightly. It is
> a lot like life, where you don't know what's going on for people, but it
> definitely makes me pause a bit in interactions online.
>
> This editor and their editing may be an extreme case, but they are not
> alone. I hope they know that from the few responses here.
>
> I have had bad interactions with obstructive, bullying, and Wikipedia rule
> tossing folks. When I have started pages I hold my breath and hope that the
> work doesn't get deleted -- or even scrutinized harshly. When I feel
> passionate about a topic I will try to fight for notability but it's always
> dicey. Then I see articles up on Wikipedia that have no business being up
> there, have two citations and are paragraphs long, but are not challenged,
> subject to the type of scrutiny the new stuff I contribute, etc.
>
> Also, adding content. Good content with citations (I'm obsessed with
> citations). Having it deleted. Being told it is too encyclopedic (yes!).
> Editors deleting content is a real problem. It just takes one to be an
> intransigent jerk and bully or rule throw their way into making the
> experience uncooperative. Sigh.
>
> So I tend to have a very long list of stuff I want to work on, much of it
> in dustier corners of Wikipedia. Thankfully my attention wanders and if a
> page heats up, I unfollow and try to walk away and refocus.... Sometimes I
> can do that. I had to do that for Louis C.K.'s TV show Horace and Pete (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horace_and_Pete) because the editing became
> super unpleasant.
>
> Then as a counterbalance....
>
> There are times like the collective editing to improve the page on the
> Reverend Clem Pinckney (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clementa_C._Pinckney
> ),
> who was killed in South Carolina during a prayer group by a white
> supremacist, and the collective creation of a page on the setting of that
> tragedy, a Wikipedia entry on the church, Mother Emanuel (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emanuel_African_Methodist_Episcopal_Church),
> that was long overdue for an article due to its historical importance in
> the African-American community. And a few other times when I've edited with
> other editors, learned stuff, just enjoyed geeking out with another person
> passionate about making Wikipedia better and more representative of the
> world we live in.
>
> I would love to do more cooperative editing. Most of the editathons we help
> out with here in NYC focus on the new editor. I think we all have a lot to
> offer each other, folks who have been adding content for a while and are
> passionate about that. I wish we did a better job supporting each other.
>
> Best,
>
> - Erika
>
>
>
>
> *Erika Herzog*
> Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>
> Secretary, Wikimedia NYC
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC>
>
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Michel Vuijlsteke <wikipe...@zog.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Welcome to my exact experience on Dutch Wikipedia. Banned for life for
> > 'outing' a power user.
> >
> > The 'outing' is in huge inverted commas -- (1) enter her on-wiki username
> > in any search engine and you get oodles of vanity page(s) with her full
> > name and (2) she'd done much worse than that to me.
> >
> > I've been called names, articles have been deleted, I've been told by
> many
> > people that, sure, were it any other person they'd be banned, and sure,
> > when she refers people to [Leck mich im Arsch] it *might* be construed as
> > uncivil, but hey, she's doing good work on vandal patrol and deleting
> > articles, so...
> >
> > Yup. It's very, very toxic at times. And nobody really cares.
> >
> > On 17 May 2016 at 14:47, Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Reaching out offlist. Anyone who knows Chris well and has helpful
> input,
> > > feel free to contact me offlist.
> > > -Pete
> > > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Chris Sherlock <
> > > chris.sherloc...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I've just been blocked forever. I've been bullied, and I'm having
> > > suicidal
> > > > thoughts.
> > > >
> > > > I don't know what to do now.
> > > >
> > > > Right now I'm reaching out to anyone who might listen.  I've been
> > called
> > > > obsessive, someone who attacks people, I've not been listened to and
> > I've
> > > > been lectured on policy by people who quote three letter shortcuts at
> > me
> > > > without reading the policy.
> > > >
> > > > An admin just told me that I had submitted too many kilobytes which
> > > > violated some sort of policy. When I pointed out that half of the
> > > kilobytes
> > > > were references I was ignored. When I pointed out that the one
> > reverting
> > > me
> > > > was deleting no contentious stuff I was told I was being contentious.
> > > When
> > > > I pointed out I had been told I'm not allowed to use primary sources
> in
> > > any
> > > > way and the policy was its ok but to use it with care, and all I was
> > > doing
> > > > was checking a company directorship, I was ignored.
> > > >
> > > > I wrote your [[exploding whale]] article. I invented your [citation
> > > > needed] tag. I started your admins noticeboard.
> > > >
> > > > But I'm not well, and nobody on Wikipedia seems to be kind. You are
> all
> > > so
> > > > busy power tripping that you forget there is a real, live person on
> the
> > > > other side. A person who is wounded. I haven't always been this
> > > depressed.
> > > > Not anxious. I stupidly logged into my account yesterday, one that
> > nobody
> > > > knew I used, and tried to edit the Salim Mehajer article. I was
> > surprised
> > > > it wasn't there, but I've never been so obstructed I all my life.
> It's
> > > not
> > > > even that there was a disagreement, it was like I wasn't worth
> > anything.
> > > I
> > > > spent hours of my time researching the article, trying to do a good
> > job.
> > > > But in an instant the material was ripped away, and I was called
> > > obsessed.
> > > >
> > > > That's not what I was called when I rewrote the [[USA PATRIOT Act]]
> > > > article. People told me it was long, but they were encouraging. My
> hard
> > > > work was appreciated.
> > > >
> > > > I've never attacked the subject of the article, Salim Mehajer. But
> > when I
> > > > was called obsessive, I guess something broke inside me. I reached
> > badly
> > > > and called the guy who called me obsessive a twit. Then I wrote a
> > bitter
> > > > article and posted it on my blog. You can read it here:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://randomtechnicalstuff.blogspot.com.au/2016/05/dont-bite-newbies-why-wikipedia-is-such.html
> > > >
> > > > Then I stewed. I couldn't stop thinking about how I'd tried to get a
> > > > decent article sorted out again, but I just couldn't seem to get
> > > traction.
> > > >
> > > > I originally had taken material from the [[City of Auburn]] article
> > that
> > > > was about the individual. I should have realised it was partisan, and
> > it
> > > > was a bad judgement call. I write done more material, but it was far
> > too
> > > > negative. I guess o didn't see it that way at the time.
> > > >
> > > > I recall I went to bed and the next day I was accused of writing an
> > > attack
> > > > article and an admin slapped on not one but two template telling me I
> > was
> > > > about to be blocked. Then I discovered the article had been deleted.
> > > Nobody
> > > > had notified me. I couldn't work out what had happened. Then I
> realised
> > > it
> > > > had been deleted.
> > > >
> > > > So I tried again. This time I started from scratch. I started to edit
> > > very
> > > > carefully. I started with a paragraph stub which just very, very
> > briefly
> > > > noted Mehajor is a deputy mayor and property developer. I think I
> > wrote a
> > > > short paragraph Bout his wedding which was very notable. It's in the
> > > > history.
> > > >
> > > > Then it was put up for deletion again. In the A7 category. I'm rusty
> at
> > > > Wikipedia, sure, but what? A7? It was for notability. But, I thought,
> > > how?
> > > > The man is highly significant! Not a day goes by without the media
> > > talking
> > > > of his exploits!
> > > >
> > > > So I objected. The editor rounded on me. He's famous for being
> famous,
> > > > like a Kardashian! he said. But I said, he was a deputy mayor and
> he's
> > > been
> > > > in the Australian media extensively! It's not just his wedding (which
> > was
> > > > notorious) - it's his property deals, and his companies, and he got
> his
> > > > entire council sacked! And he is in court all the time and is under
> an
> > > AFP
> > > > investigation! That *is* notable!
> > > >
> > > > But, I was told, there's not enough In the article. I was referred to
> > > > another acronym about notability. But I know about notability
> policy, I
> > > > thought. It's about the subject, not the content of the article..,
> > > > desperately I hunted through the policy git the section on this. I'd
> > read
> > > > it before, years ago. If the article was deleted before I got a
> chance
> > to
> > > > object, I'd be called a troll, or worse. I'd be blocked for
> recreating
> > > it.
> > > > In the nick of time I found the section and objected, and I asked to
> > have
> > > > it put on Articles For Deletion. And I pointed out I was literally
> > > editing
> > > > the article when it was almost deleted - because it didn't establish
> > > enough
> > > > context. But, I thought, how do you establish context of the article
> is
> > > > deleted midway through editing it?
> > > >
> > > > The editor took off the CSD template. I breathed a sigh of relief.
> Then
> > > > they stick on a {{notability}} template. This, I was informed, meant
> > that
> > > > the article could be merged, redirected, or deleted if notability
> > > couldn't
> > > > be determined. But, I thought - I just established that! I didn't
> want
> > it
> > > > to be deleted midway through editing, and redirecting would have been
> > as
> > > > bad. And merged and redirected to what? It was already redirected to
> > > [[City
> > > > of Auburn Council#History]], but that was clearly wrong. No, it was
> > going
> > > > to be deleted. I objected, and eventually removed the template, to
> > > > strenuous objections from the one who put it on. I suggested it be
> put
> > up
> > > > for deletion and offered to do it myself. But the editor seemed
> > > reluctant.
> > > > So, I reasoned, well if they truly feel that way they list it for
> > > deletion.
> > > > At least then we'll get consensus one way or another.
> > > >
> > > > So, now templates less but incomplete, I started to add material. I
> > > > decided to start off with his early life. This was good, but every
> > time I
> > > > tried to add more material I found I was getting edit conflicts
> because
> > > > that same editor appeared to have watchlisted the article. I sent
> the a
> > > > message asking then to hold off editing. I also asked them not to
> > remove
> > > > huge swathes of information.
> > > >
> > > > Then I got to the bit where a court case was referred to. To
> establish
> > > > context, I quoted both the widely reported words said by the accused
> > and
> > > > the defendant. I used a secondary source that was very reliable - the
> > > > Australian ABC News website. This was summarily removed. The edit
> > summary
> > > > read BLP violation.
> > > >
> > > > Eh? I know what BLP is, but that can't be right. I asked why on the
> > talk
> > > > page. "It's because of BLPCRIME" they said. "You can't do it". But, I
> > > said,
> > > > I don't want to summarise their words, that could look worse for
> > Mehajer!
> > > > And I need to explain the case fairly do the reader knows what it's
> > > > about... I was told to read the policy. Grumbling, I read it to
> refresh
> > > my
> > > > memory. It read that non-public figures should not have allegations
> put
> > > on
> > > > articles. Well, I thought, this does t apply here - Mehajer is a very
> > > > public figure and this was reported widely.
> > > >
> > > > And on and on it went. Every time I edited the article I would be
> > edited
> > > > as quickly. It was like I was being stalked. Eventually, however, the
> > > > exasperation of that editor was too much. He listed the article on
> > > Requests
> > > > For Comment. But, I thought, I remember RFC back in the day. We used
> to
> > > > hash these things out on the talk page first! And normally there was
> > some
> > > > sort of compromise - line the opposing party would say "why not
> > summarise
> > > > it thusly" and you'd look at it and go "well, OK, but I'd summarise
> it
> > > like
> > > > this". And the partite would come up with something reasonable. Not
> do
> > > this
> > > > editor - it was no information on the case at all, just that there
> had
> > > been
> > > > a case.
> > > >
> > > > So then things went very bad. He decided to ask at the Australisn
> > > > Wikipedias Noticeboard. From there, a South Ausyrslusn editor turned
> > up,
> > > > took a look at the section that detailed vehicle incidents and just
> > > removed
> > > > it. Then on the talk page he panned the edits as "obsessive" and
> > > "trivial".
> > > > In fact, he was just getting started..,
> > > >
> > > > "the compilation of all the companies he's a director of, many of
> which
> > > > are so non-notable the author has had to refer to business
> registration
> > > > records, is an atrocious case of original research and absolutely
> does
> > > not
> > > > belong in this article. These are such trivial details that no
> > journalist
> > > > has bothered to compile them in any of the tens of thousands of
> stories
> > > > about him for a reason."
> > > >
> > > > I was gob smacked. I had sourced every one if the companies to a
> > > secondary
> > > > source. One of the sources was an article in The Australian, a major
> > > Aussie
> > > > newspaper. It pointed to a PDF which detailed a list of companies
> > > > associated with Mehajer.
> > > >
> > > > And at this point we end at the beginning. I rage quit, then I was
> > > > messages by an editor from Perth, who taunted me, telling me I had
> > > > relevance deprivation syndrome. I was already feeling fragile, but
> this
> > > > egged me on I suppose. If I'd been feeling less fragile I just would
> > have
> > > > let it go.
> > > >
> > > > So I did something inexcusable. I told the editor who had been
> stalking
> > > me
> > > > what I thought of them. I swore at them and called them bad names. It
> > was
> > > > reverted.
> > > >
> > > > I continued editing. It was hell or high water! I knew if I could
> just
> > > ask
> > > > them to explain there decisions I could get the article into shape.
> So
> > I
> > > > asked again why non-controversial material was removed. Nobody would
> > > > answer. I put back material and wrote a long talk message. I was
> > reverted
> > > > with a response that didn't answer why it was a problem. I kept
> > tweeting
> > > > because there was nothing else I could do. Even important material,
> > > utterly
> > > > non-controversial, was removed.
> > > >
> > > > Eventually, however, they started to suggest what the issues were.
> They
> > > > said it was fine to include his traffic offenses, but it had to be
> cut
> > > > down. But, I explained, it's actually only one sentence and I
> detailed
> > > what
> > > > the offenses were otherwise it might give an impression his offenses
> > > were a
> > > > lot worse than they were! I asked what they should be changed to.
> And,
> > I
> > > > pointed out, you still haven't explained why the other material is a
> > > > violation of Biographies of Living People!
> > > >
> > > > There was no response. Instead, I was reverted. So I reverted again
> > > > because no answer had been provided.
> > > >
> > > > Then I got a message. I was told that actually the admin hadn't read
> > the
> > > > material but he'd noticed that the total kilobytes of text had
> > ballooned.
> > > > But, I said on my talk page - half of that size is in references!
> > > > Irrelevant, I was told. You aren't editing to consensus. If someone
> > > removes
> > > > material, under no circumstances must you ready it until you discuss
> > it.
> > > >
> > > > But the other editor is refusing to discuss it with me! Again I
> pointed
> > > > out the bits that were being removed without being discussed. Tough I
> > was
> > > > told.
> > > >
> > > > In sheer bloody minded frustration I reverted the admin. Then I
> posted
> > to
> > > > the admins incident page pleading for someone to see reason. Then I
> got
> > > yet
> > > > another message telling me I had been reported for edit warring.
> > > >
> > > > I tried post, got in the first bit to appeal. But then I tried list
> > more,
> > > > to plead my innocence and rotary to make someone understand I ha dead
> > at
> > > > the end if my tether. My wife came in and startled me. I literally
> > jumped
> > > > and yelled, severely startling her badly. I felt dreadful.
> > > >
> > > > Then I raced out of the house, got in my car and parked in a quiet
> > spot.
> > > I
> > > > posted to the only place I had left. A bitter post, stating who I had
> > > been
> > > > and what I had contributed and what I had just been through.
> > > >
> > > > This wax reverted by the admin Nick-D, from Western Australia who
> > banned
> > > > my rage quitted account (whose passwords scrambled, so it's
> > inaccessible
> > > > anyway) and had my mobile IP address blocked got a week, though I had
> > > tried
> > > > to explain I would be home later and it's best block my other IP
> > address
> > > > which is my NBN IP. It was, I had said in the message, a relief.
> > > >
> > > > But not only was this rolled back, but the user page was locked.
> > > >
> > > > My despair and humiliation is total. So here I sit, contemplating the
> > > mess
> > > > my life is in and how it's not worth even the ability to edit
> > Wikipedia,
> > > > Wikipedia the project I loved and I gave do much if my time and date
> > to.
> > > A
> > > > project where I worked to gain consensus and wrote amazing article
> with
> > > > others, and researched for and went to meet ups and borrow books from
> > the
> > > > library to ensure the world got the best possible information I could
> > > > locate about a subject.
> > > >
> > > > I know I'm not well. I have fought this feeling for a decade. It's
> why
> > I
> > > > left the Tbsdy_lives account when Brad emailed me. At least then you
> > gave
> > > > me small degree of dignity, and deleted my user pages.
> > > >
> > > > There is no more dignity to be given me. I've used up my portion.
> > > >
> > > > And I sit here in my car and contemplate suicide. My despair is
> total.
> > > > There is not a kind one amongst you. You have taken my right of
> appeal,
> > > my
> > > > ability to protest and my dignity. You have let others mock me, and I
> > > have
> > > > failed to contribute to Wikipedias great mission - one I feel so
> > keenly.
> > > >
> > > > I failed. I'm not sure what I'm going to do next. I will drive, I
> don't
> > > > know where. I pray my family forgives me.
> > > >
> > > > Chris
> > > > Ta bu shi da yu
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to