This post is part of a three-part series on the grievous deficiencies of Wikipedia administrators.

I’ve been complaining recently about how much I hate Wikipedia’s administrators. When I wrote my first blog post here about why I really hate these admins, all comments I got were against me. Well it turns out that all these comments were made by administrators trying to defend themselves. Guess what, admins? Other people hate you too. Here’s a blog post I found that highlights some of the fallacies of administrators on Wikipedia:
This post first appeared on thewebservice.co.uk under the title “The Problem with Wikipedia”, and was written by mrwebservice. It has been edited by Deathgleaner for use on this blog.

Wikipedia sucks.

Why do I say this?  Obviously I’ve just had yet another bad experience with the self-professed Gods who “manage” the encyclopaedia… but is this a case of sour grapes or evidence of a fundamental problem? One or even a few incidents and you get a little irritated, but a bizarre attitude seems to be endemic to Wiki’s mods. So let’s take a look at just why Wikipedia sucks quite so badly.

Who wants to be a Wikipedia moderator?  Why would you want to do it?  How would you find the time?  Why would you be bothered?  Here are the reasons:

  1. You want to contribute something of value to the human race: knowledge.  A noble thought.  But why not just contribute in the normal way?  Because you are a prolific contributor and want to feel a little important.
  2. You have a burning hatred of “spammers” and pranksters who leave their trail of junk contributions and links wherever they go.  You fight the good fight and think of yourself as a crusader against spam.  And you have the badges on your profile page to prove it.
  3. You have acres of spare time and don’t know what to do with it.  You may be old or unemployed and debating on forums does not carry the import or weight of helping to manage the most used encyclopaedia in the world.
  4. You have a personal agenda to follow and you need the power to carry it through.  Knowledge is power and you have the keys.

wikipedia message 4

Now, let’s take a pinch of all these attributes and mix them together. What do we end up with?  I’ll tell you what.  A trumped-up & twisted little troll so filled with their own self-importance they are about to explode.

The two breeds of Wikipedia Moderators

In general, though, there are two types of Wikipedia moderator.

Wikipedia Moderator #1: the instigator with a vested interest

This is maybe the most dangerous breed.  They have established a small reputation and perhaps following on Wikipedia through their collection of at best pedestrian and at worst moronic contributions.  For whatever reason they have staked out a claim on a small patch of Wikipedia and see it as “theirs”.  They were there first.  Their material should stay.  They’ve seen off countless spammers and weak revisions and are invincible.

wikipedia sucks message 5

These moderators will pounce on any revisions you make and systematically delete them.  They may even try and delete whole articles you’ve written.

Wikipedia Moderator #2: the spam-hater with the itchy mouse finger

Although the instigators are pretty depressing, I think it’s actually these people that are the worst.  These moderators cycle through the whole of Wikipedia looking for things to delete.  Because they spend their time cycling through all the articles nominated for deletion, they don’t really have any specialism (other than being a tenacious “crusader”, with “left-wing” views so potent they actually make Hitler look like a hobbyist)

These jumped-up jobsworths who were misinformed about their lineage can’t comprehend what they’re reading 99% of the time and are happy to just keep clicking away.  Delete-delete-delete.  They’re doing everyone a service, after all.  Where would Wikipedia be without them?  It would be a seething link farm filled with “original research” and garbage.  Every time something is deleted, the moderator has brought some good back to the world.  The criterion for deletion is simple: if it’s been nominated, rip it out.

Why the two breeds are bad for anyone with anything to say

These two types of moderator work together.  Step one: the instigator with the vested interest notices you and starts causing problems.  Once the instigator has nominated something for deletion, or you’ve got into an argument with him about something that’s already been deleted, like some evil genie in a bottle, the spam-hater with the itchy trigger finger pops up.  If something’s been nominated for deletion, “click” goes the spam-hater, and it’s gone.  They don’t think twice.  They are crusaders, after all.

You can’t Complain about Wikipedia Moderators

Wikipedia is “not a democracy” and there’s no higher order to complain to when things go wrong – just a seething collective of no-hopers who have formed alliances and like nothing more than slapping these laughable phallic symbols all over the place:

wikipedia sucks message 2

That’s right.  You want to play by the rules and you’ve done your research.  Your revisions are accurate and you have the links to prove it; your article was neutral and you want to argue your case; you’ve done your research and you actually followed Wikipedia policy.  The trouble is, all of these policies are open to considerable interpretation, and there are so many rules and guidelines that there will always be something to throw at you.  Remember, it’s not about debate.  The decision has been made.

Wikipedia is essentially the biggest committee in the world.

Wikipedia is a big committee.  And committees are crap.  Everyone knows that.  There are 1,614 admins on the English Wikipedia at the time of writing which is both a massive amount of people to be generating red tape and also a bizarrely minuscule number of people when you consider the millions of pages Wikipedia contains.  So we’re really talking about the cream: the most mean-spirited, petty people on the planet.

Let’s hunt down and destroy Wikipedia moderators

I would like to hear of anyone and everyone’s bad experiences of Wikipedia.  Perhaps we should all band together and form our own collective of Anti-Wikipedians.  Any Wikipedia moderators with an axe to grind can go elsewhere.  I have a rigid set of rules and guidelines in place and what that boils down to is I don’t like Wikipedians and I will delete your comment and glue my own banners all over your smug, self-regarding faces.

wikipedia sucks message 3

— END RE-BLOG —

This post received many comments which cursed administrators. Here are just a few:

They don’t give you reasons for deleting your content until you complain to them, and then it’s usually some lame excuse, then if you do exactly what they say, THEY STILL DELETE YOUR CONTENT. I hate Wikipedia and I think it should burn.

So true, Wikipedia is full of Nazi’s that’s why I quit. Most of the vandalism is done by so called admins them selves, I post an article and they delete it (vandalism) saying we don’t feel we need that. So if I write an article about something video games related a person who doesn’t know anything about video games or the internet deletes it?

As a former Wikipedia contributor with 2K+ edits and 50+ created articles, I couldn’t agree more with what you said! Looking back, the idea is fatally flawed.

I tried to put up a photo which i took myself and it was deleted using ‘copyrighted’ as a excuse. Copyrighted..? My own image..? That doesn’t make sense. I even tried to edit one article by inserting only one sentence using ‘credible’ sources and yet what happens: deleted. I was surprised by how quickly deletions take place. This one was only a matter of minutes. Those people must stay glued to their screens 24/7 looking to see if anyone has added anything so it can be deleted.

The criteria for using Wikipedia totally sucks. You have to do this; you have to do that; and, when you comply – there is another rule to follow.

If one of their people writes an article about YOU or your business, THEY get exclusive right to control the content. They also have a ‘blocking’ policy that prevents you from contributing if you threaten them with legal action. So, basically, they can totally misrepresent your source of income, possibly causing a loss of business, and then lock you out from complaining about it.

I had a run in with some today, it seems that they don’t have to follow rules or guidelines, can make up their own rules on the spot and ban people who are trying to stop vandals (or for any other reason they like). i have been trying to stop vandals and have been banned for a day because of it…the way the admins act completely defeats the point of having rules and guidelines to follow.

WIKI[PEDIA] is entertainment for losers without a job. It’s not an open community, in fact, anything you add gets deleted or reverted by some looser admin who thinks it only goes his way.

Wikipedia began a rapid toboggan slide down a very slippery slope with the advent of moderation. It is ironic that moderators, putatively introduced to remove the bias (in addition to misinformation, poorly written content and spam) from Wikipedia, have instead replaced user-contributed bias with their own, moderator-contributed brand of heavy-handed chauvinism, pettiness and personal agendas.

Exactly, administrators. It’s not just me, it’s all the regular users. Administrators, you have bashed us non-admins enough. You think you know everything. You think you’re perfect. You think the world revolves around you. You think of all this bullsh*t that’s not true, and when a regular user makes ONE TINY EDIT you just have to throw a bunch of stones at that user and mess with him/her, don’t you? So follow the rules like everyone else does and quit being retards, you administrators.

Published by Geoffrey Liu

A software engineer by trade and a classical musician at heart. Currently a software engineer at Groupon getting into iOS mobile development. Recently graduated from the University of Washington, with a degree in Computer Science and a minor in Music. Web development has been my passion for many years. I am also greatly interested in UI/UX design, teaching, cooking, biking, and collecting posters.

69 thoughts on “Why other people really hate Wikipedia administrators as well

  1. hey Anthony, you seems really hit. Please receive my sympathy empathy whatever, I not the master in leaving things behind but it says that is a good thing.

    How about the social media managers, whom are paid people to influence the public ? Would you think they would not interfere with Wikipedia just for the sake of a noble idea ?

    I have just cheeked on Indeed, right now at the hour I am writing the reply, and I got 1,024 jobs as Social Media Manager in a 3 mil. people city.

    Social media is doomed…

  2. Do u wanna know who else is annoying, freaking Geraldo Perez of course. No matter how much evidence you provided to him and prove that your right with the sources you find, he’ll just revert it and don’t even care.

  3. Another thing I forgot to mention. Once this comment section gets closed down, Ebyabe won’t be watching this anymore when it gets closed. All I can say is once that happens, thank god!

  4. @Conner

    Also Conner, if you look here:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ebyabe/talkpagepics, you can see at the bottom that he wrote a whole bunch of stuff just to mock me. If you go click on the page history, I actually did try to delete the threatening comments he wrote about, but at the end I restored it back. The reason why I did is because it’s his page not mine, i also know he’s gonna have it protected “Again” as usual like he does to his talk pages and other articles. I even said to myself after I restored it “You know, I’m not even gonna bother with this, it’s his page not mine, and he can write what ever he wants about me. I can tell people what to do and what not to do with their pages.” So ya like I said, he can write what ever he wants about me, they are all just a bunch of lies he’s saying and no one is not gonna buy it at all. They are just gonna roll their eyes and ignore it like I do. I don’t care if he has it protected or not, but it’s his page, not mine.

    • Also, there’s this unknown IP user out there that editing all the Thomas and Friends related articles on there and he’s blaming that IP user for being controlled by me. I looked at the edit history on all of them Thomas related articles and I had nothing to do with them, whoever is using that IP address is probably impersonating me, because I have never use that single IP address that edited those Thomas articles before ever.

      • As usual, he’s gonna get User:IJBall to turn against me as usual. As soon as Ebyabe replies to him, he’s gonna give away my username from the other wikis I’m on currently, not wikipedia I mean. First off, there’s a person you don’t even know, you don’t give away their personal info, it’s private, he should know better than that. But IJBall asked anyways, Ebyabe still hasn’t replied yet.

    • @Conner

      By the way Conner, I even thought to myself the same thing as I said about Homechallange55 having a lot of hate on me. As for Ebyabe, I said the same thing to myself “Why would you say and mention lies of a lot of hate over a person you don’t even know…” But whatever, like I said, he can say what ever he wants about me.

  5. Even though I said I’m no longer active on there permanently. I know that the damage has already been done here on his Commons talk page; https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ebyabe#/talk/1, I posted to him back in 2016 about suing him and stuff. But like I said before and I’ll say it again, I didn’t even mean it at all, I only said all that because I was just angry. But I will regret it for writing all that to him. Even though it’s “HIS” talk page and he can do what he chants with it, I don’t care if he doesn’t believe me at all about when it posted all that to him back in 2016 about suing him. I even explained to him that I didn’t even mean it at all, but until he told me to not write on there anymore on his Commons talk page, he still didn’t even believe me. But he’s right, it “IS” his talk page and he can do what he wants with it, besides he has it protected until September 2018. Even though I still can’t get him to believe me for what I said, I’m not even gonna bother with him on his wiki Commons talk page anymore, I really mean it this time, I will not post there anymore starting this year. It’s best to leave him alone and move on, I don’t care if he keeps laying about me over and over, because like I said, he can do what he wants because it “HIS” talk page. It’s best not to take it to far.

  6. Still, Ebyabe and Sro23 can say what ever lies they want about me, it’s there talk pages, not mine. I’m not even gonna bother on spamming his and Sro’s talk pages over and over again, they didn’t even know me. Who cares what he says, I’m permanently done for good this time on Wikipedia, I will never click on and edit any article ever again on there.

    • Especially that nut case Homechallenge55. Blaming people over his issues, even when me blamed me of having issues (In which I don’t in real life), all I thought to myself was “Dude… why would you have so much hatred for a person you don’t even know…” because he’s the one that has issues. But whatever, Homechallange55 can do what he wants and lie many times he wants, it doesn’t even bother me. 🙄

  7. You know Ebyabe, for what you just said here:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Ebyabe/talkpagepics&diff=830833432&oldid=830400475. I can talk about you as many times as I want, there’s no law that says we can’t talk about what ever we want in this world. People can say what they want, you can’t control them. I don’t even care what you keeping saying or updating things, who gives a crap. It’s fine, keep playing the victim all you want. Besides, everyone out there is not gonna put up with your crap with all the bad and horrible stuff you keep posting, and they will not be by your side anymore if you keep doing this. Just saying, if you keep this up with the bad things, people are gonna turn away from you and not support you for all the stuff you do. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

    • He even told me on the 191.101.30.254 address a while back. he told be to just go back to the Disney Wiki and keep adding various edits as much as I desire. But you know what, I’ll gladly do that then, in which I’m still doing. So I would have to put up with him anymore.

  8. Look at this:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sro23&diff=830167792&oldid=830137909, again with the lies from Ebyabe. Blaming me of harassing him on the Commons Wiki, take a look here for yourself:https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ebyabe&diff=291984548&oldid=291979309 and here:https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ebyabe&diff=291997863&oldid=291995926. Does it look like I harassed him at all?, No. This is exactly what I’m talking about that he won’t take any criticism. He’s still playing the victim acting like he didi nothing wrong, he’s nothing but a liar. But it’s ok, like I said he can lie about me al he wants, because what he says about me is not true. Besides, Conner and Matthew Flores agree with me and are on my side. They went though the same situations too, like I said before and I’ll say it again. It’s best to move on and ignore it, that’s the very last time I will post on his Wiki Commons talk page, I wasn’t even spamming it at all too. But whatever, time to move on! 😉

    • Hey Anthony, thanks for the notification on my talkpage. For whatever reason I just now saw it today even though it was posted a couple days ago. I saw that Sro23 was mentioned on here, yet again. He just can’t seem to keep himself out of other people’s business. It’s like he actually looks for trouble on Wikipedia and then proceeds to further instigate it.

      Well guess what? He’s likely going to become an admin soon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Optional_RfA_candidate_poll/Archive_10#Sro23:_February_13,_2018

      And of course, as expected, he has all of the support from his many followers, lol.

      The day that Sro23 becomes an admin is the day that I officially stop editing Wikipedia for good. I still can’t get over the fact that he somehow found an account of mine that I don’t even use on the main English Wikipedia: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Conkird

      Also, I’m pretty sure that Widr has just completely given up on blocking my IP addresses. He still stalks all of my edits and reverts them on-sight but he doesn’t even block my IP addresses anymore. The last IP address of mine that he blocked was ‎198.236.58.11 which he blocked for six months back in October, and it belongs to the college that I go to. Luckily that block expires in about a month from now…

      • What!?!?!? Are you seriously!?!?!? Omg… what are they thinking for making him into one!?!? In my opinion, I think he’s a terrible choice to become an admin. Seriously, what is go through there minds for planning on making him into an admin soon. I still can’t even picture it already, on how he’s gonna be like when he becomes one. He’s gonna be physically abusing his power against everyone he edits towards whoever, it’s gonna be out of control with him. I’m with you as well, I will not touch a single article ever again when he becomes one in the future. Especially Ebyabe too, if you already saw the links I posted above, over what he keeps on doing to me. Making abusive jokes.

      • P.S. By the way, if you don’t know this already. Ebyabe is actually watching us for what ever we post on here, in which it’s basically stalking. I know… it’s creepy. He can’t even learn to mind his own business, he doesn’t need to know everything we post/write on here. What he’s doing right now is basically stalking us and keeping an eye on all of us for everything we talk about here. He even stalked and fallowed me here to this blog I created of Sro23:http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=8988&sid=8d54b83cdc19e058ff3a411612ec0cdd. he basically joined just to annoy me, he replied “What Anthony fails to mention is his harassment of users on other sites like Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage and the TARDIS wikia, myself being one of those so harassed. Anthony has been editing on Wikipedia since February of 2012. He was blocked in December 2013 and has been sockpuppeting ever since. He has been told ad nauseum what to do and not to do. Either he is choosing to ignore that or is incapable of understanding. It’s like he has a hammer and everyone is telling him, “Don’t hit yourself with the hammer, you can hurt yourself.” His response is essentially, “Oh yeah, I’ll show them!” and then proceeds to hit himself repeatedly, followed by blaming everyone else for the injuries. Moving on would entail not editing on Wikipedia anymore. But sadly, past behavior indicates this is unlikely. So I’ll say it again. Stop hitting yourself with the hammer.” I mean, seriously… he just wrote all that just to get people to turn against me and “AGAIN” play the victim, what he wrote on there was basically an abusive threat. First off I said it before and I’ll say it again, I didn’t harass him, he harassed me. I only went on the Commons Wiki and the TARDIS Wiki just to tell him to stop with his bad behavior, I never threaten him at all or blame anyone at all on there, I even never said any death threats to him at all either. I was only standing up for myself against him, because I know violence is not the answer too. But seriously, he needs to stop playing the victim and just confess for what he’s been doing to us and everyone else. I just don’t understand why the admins themself’s don’t even see the bad things he’s been doing to us and everyone else, I mean seriously… are the admins blind? I mean come on, are they seriously “THAT” lazy?!?!? Like I said before in my previous comments, if I was an admin, I would immediately put my foot down and do the right thing and ban the bad users, that’s it. But he really needs to stop stalking/watching us and stop posting updates on his talk page over what ever we keep writing on here. It’s really creepy, but just ignore him and don’t read what he says on his talk pages.

      • Another thing I’m glad is that mr. idiot nut case Homechallenge55 left me alone, that’s a nick name I call him, because he really is a nut case. As I showed before, here:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:2600:1000:B03B:30F9:D9C5:51AC:1BF2:2543, if you read it, he actually blamed me for having mental illness in real life over my editing and crap… I was like thinking to myself after he wrote that “Dude are you seriously… you don’t even know me….” I just rolled my eyes after me posted that. For someone to write angry messages like that, (if you saw in the link I posted.) and says stuff like that, means that they are crazy people and he’s one of them. Blaming someone for having mental illness is a stupid thing to say, seriously… Homechallenge55 is f***ed up in the head. He just gets angry at people when ever things don’t go his way, acts like he knows everything. 🙄

      • Also, the reason why I made all of Homechallenge55’s comments on private, is because I couldn’t delete his threatening comments when I use to use that IP address. When ever I try to delete them, it keeps giving me this message in a red box, saying it has been disallowed over an issue and other stuff. It means that the page was disabled for me to delete messages, which is bull crap. When someone sending you a threatening messages, you have the right to delete it.

  9. Also, here’s a little update for what he just wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Ebyabe/talkpagepics&diff=830133188&oldid=818562367. He posted this just to mock me, but who cares, I’m not mad at all. Because the reason is I’ve just recently commented on his talk page on Wiki Commons and I was only telling about that comment I posted there back in 2016 about suing him was just a joke. I said it because I was only testing him to see his reaction, not harassment. He even asked to reply to him only on his Wikipedia talk page, but guess what, I’m not going too. I’ve been done for several months already, so who cares. Even though I’m finished with that said, Ebyabe can go to hell anyways, he can say what ever he wants about me, it’s his talk page. I don’t care if he lies about me or not, because what he says about me is not true, he’s the one that caused it anyways. Just like he did to *cough* Vincent D’Onofrio’s wife *cough*. It’s best to move on and ignore it, he’s an idiot anyways. Who cares what he says! 🙂

    P.S. Bullies need to learn to clean up there act. 😉

  10. I just showed my mom Ebyabe’s user/talk page and showed her that he called us “Idiots” and “morons”. Even my mom said he’s an idiot, as well for posting all that for what he said. Well no matter what, I’m preeminently done for good this time. I’m not gonna let them get all over me anymore, Ebyabe can lie about me all he want’s and blame the stress on me, in which case he’s the one that caused it against me, making me all stressed out and angry. I’m just gonna keep my focus on the fan site Disney Wiki and others, I have better things to do than to put up with him and all of them admins on Wikipedia. Disney Wiki admins are more respectful and better than that site, It’s best to just ignore them and move on. 😉

  11. Another important lesson I learned is that when ever there’s a user/admin you don’t like and that’s harassing you, never spam their talk pages. Because it will only make things worse for you, I admit it that I did it to Ebyabe on Commons Wiki and on the Tardis Wiki too, but still now I’m gonna regret it for doing it and I learned my lesson to never do that again. Besides, the admin on the Tardis Wiki would listen to me, I knew she (Shambala108) was gonna defend him and be by his side, not surprised. I’m actually glad I’m ban from that site, I didn’t wanna be part of it anyways so I wouldn’t have to put up with bad users like him and her. I also realized that Ebyabe also has an account on the Disney Wiki too, but you know what, I’m not even gonna bother with him on there, I’m not even gonna go and spam his talk page on there like I did on the Tardis Wiki by mistake. Besides, I have better things to do than to put up with him. If he messages me on my talk page on the Disney Wiki, I’ll just delete it, ignore him and move on. Because I’m not even gonna listen too him and to any of his lies. Like I said, Disney Wiki has been so good to me for the past 4 years I’ve been on there and I never picked on or harassed anyone on there at all. They are good to me and I’m good to them back. 😉

    • P.S. Even though she (Shambala108) wouldn’t listen to me on the Tardis Wiki, she can defend him all she wants, I don’t even care. Even no matter what wiki he’s on. As long as I leave him (Ebyabe) alone, he’ll leave me alone. That’s all it matters, it’s best to just move on. 🙂

  12. I just noticed that part 2 of this blog got closed now too. Liu I’m sorry, please don’t close this one too. But I swear, I’m not trying to spam all of them. I didn’t mean to post once and twice, it’s because I kept on making typos in my comments by mistake. My phone does it and that’s why I kept on post repeats of the same comments. Because I keep making typos and my phone corrects my words by mistake. Please don’t close this one, please.

  13. I just wish the admins would do the right thing and ban all the cyber bullies that harrased us and everyone else out there, not us. They shouldn’t be supporting bullies.

  14. I had been contributing on Wikipedia in several languages for nearly or more than 10 years, and was just blocked. Phew, I should take this as a chance to get away from this world.

  15. Here’s another incident on what happen to me this past May 2017, I requested Racharl Lillis’ years active to be added in the article on here talk page:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rachael_Lillis&action=history, but as always, (Mr. won’t take criticism) Sro23, denied my request and told me to “Go Home!”, because he’s ben giving trouble for the longest time, Ebyabe also got involved and Ponyo (sock puppet of BMK) also refused and protected the talk page, be I removed Sro23’s harassment comment and other stuff. I’m afraid if I repost the request again, I’ll get more trouble from them again. But who cares, they are just bully losers with no lives and with waaaaaay too much time in their hands… 🙄

    • Here’s another incident on what happen to me this past May 2017, I requested Racharl Lillis’ years active to be added in the article on here talk page:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rachael_Lillis&action=history, but as always, (Mr. won’t take criticism) Sro23, denied my request and told me to “Go Home!”, because he’s ben giving trouble for the longest time, Ebyabe also got involved and Ponyo (sock puppet of BMK) also refused and protected the talk page, be I removed Sro23’s harassment comment and other stuff. I’m afraid if I repost the request again, I’ll get more trouble from them again. But who cares, they are just bully losers with no lives and with waaaaaay too much time in their hands… 🙄

  16. Hey: i know this is super late too, but i wanted to let you know how your attitude, humor and valid points helped to assuage the major trauma associated with recently being completely severed from Wikipedia in truly vindictive style. While I agree that bad admins/editors should face justice, i won’t use any names in case they could link back to me, i deserve my privacy if they do. Anyways i tried to fix one tiny (and kinda racist) article, and that’s when a longtime editor literally shouted “hey! I need some muscle over here!” in the talk comments. Naturally i was freaked out, being a newbie to the extreme who just wanted to help. Just two days later i was completely forbidden from ever editing again or creating a clean account for an “indefinite period” due to falsified claims of “persistent vandalism” followed by totally unmerited “sockpuppet investigations”, just because a few people had DARED to speak up for me on the talk page (oh, karma police! Arrest me! Arrest this girl!!), all by, get this, some douchebag editor who LITERALLY claims on his own user page that he is an admin using a completely separate account for “security concerns”, although he will talk about his true identity only to “other admins”. Like, wtf? So admins can be abusive and have all the sock puppets they want, and yet they go about accusing others of the same behavior, even if it’s totally untrue as well as definitely unproven, and get them instantly banned? “Ignore All Rules” sure is convenient! However, lastly i just wanna say not all admins are such conscious a**holes: i read one awesome admin’s comments bemoaning his fellow bureaucrats’ own depravities, saying: “if Wikipedia dies, it will be because an influential faction, and close to a consensus, has decided that experienced Wikipedians don’t need to be as civil as newcomers. What’s worse, is that so many otherwise respectable Wikipedians are pretending that we have the opposite problem, which makes a constructive discussion impossible, as well as making it hard to believe them about anything else.” AMEN TO THAT MAN, if you ask me more mature admins/editors like THIS dude with clearly identifiable user pages should be congratulated and promoted in some way, and the real problem is with young little sniveling cowards who feel like gods hiding behind their despicable sock puppetry and lack of ways to communicate with them directly. But just my two cents, thanks again, have a good day y’all

    • Agree. These posts help me to ease my feelings. There should have been problems with me, but the admins can destroy the primal objective of Wikipedia.

    • @Dory

      No worries Dory, I’m with you too. My best advice is to just stay off of there and ignore them permanently. That’s what I do.

  17. I’m really late commenting on this haha, but the administrator emotionallama is a complete c**t (excuse the language). I was editing a few articles about the band Underworld because they were incorrect and needed changing to avoid being misleading. Anyway, while I’m correcting away I get a truckload of notifications from them saying that I was apparently trying to change stuff that was factual (it was in regards to their discography), I’m sorry but as someone who has followed Karl Hyde and Rick Smith’s music religiously I think I know their history much better than some low life who sits in their chair distorting articles under the guise of ‘admin’ and deletes edits or even bans editors they don’t like. If they message me again in the next hour or two I’m going to tell them to get f**ked, then I’ll stop editing (they’ll most likely run of crying that I’ve been “disruptive” and try to get me banned haha).

    • I just edited on an article on Macau that fixed a tiny error, and yet here a few days later I get a message from a crazy admin that it’s not allowed and he deleted my correction. I did a lot on Chinese articles and these idiot admins who have 0 knowledge of Chinese deletes it! There’s many more. There’s so many errors with so many articles that these admins think their edition is 100% correct but isn’t. Full of crazy minor and major errors, language-wise, grammar-wise or otherwise. Get rid of Wikipedia, and put a up a better version to it where corrections and fixes are allowed, instead of being deleted just because an admins hates it even when it’s correct.

      • I feel your pain man, just to warn you. Sro23 is the worst of them all, I talked about him numerous times on Geoffrey Liu’s “Why i really Hate Wiki Admins” previous blogs. But my best advice for you is ignore them and move on, that’s what I do. Because violence is not the answer.

  18. They moderators Dharmadhyaksha and spacemanspiff are idiots. I have created an article of “Rakshit Tandon” a cyber security expert whose profile is verified by Facebook. Still these idiots think that the person is not notable who have speaken for united nation and european commission. Search and found more than 1000s of articles on him. They first deleted one article and after something deleted my another article blaming of conflict of interest. If i have expertise in cyber field, will i be suitable for writing about nano technology. . Belive me they are idiots and i speciallly thanks you for writing such a great article.

    • That’s what hate too, I hate those kind of people that takes the blame on another person that they never did and they get away with it, especially Sro23 and Ebyabe. I feel you man!

    • I know I’m late replying lol, but I totally agree with you, like I said in my comment I think, as a diehard fan of Underworld I think I know a heck of a lot more than low-life, bullying scum like emotionallama (the name is probably a reference to their constant anger at anyone who corrects the blatant mistakes on their articles) when it comes to their history, what is “factual” and what they have and haven’t done. That Spamhater guy sounds like a right twat as well. Sorry for the bad language haha, but that idiot administrator has seriously pissed me off.

      • But it’s ok, I doesn’t matter if your late at replying. Besides, they have so much wrong information on some of there articles and the admins don’t do nothing about it, they never fix them right away. They take there sweet little time getting through situations of their’s. They have a mind of there own. Those idiots!

  19. I forgot to add, the media organisation I work for, which is one of the largest in the world, bans Wikipedia because of its ‘total unreliablility and untrustworthiness’. It’s also increasingly manipulated by big corporations with the time and resource to monitor and change pages. A great idea but one doomed to fail by its own success.

  20. It’s the arrogance and rudeness of these self-appointed traffic wardens that is irritating. I have found one = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RHaworth – who delighted in deleting articles and just firing off rude replies because his own life is clearly so bloody inadequate. Just look at the picture of the troll on his page and you will see why he finds his thrills on Wikipedia.

    • I have just fallen foul of RHaworth myself. Was in the process of creating my first article about a musician. I created in my own user space, and did not publish as it was by no means finished.
      The help text tells you this is a safe space and articles here will not be reviewed.

      Within hours RHaworth had deleted it!

      This bloke is seriously annoying.
      Wikipedia is going to die if new contributors are treated like this.

  21. Bravo… a wonderful piece. I attempted to write a page for Wiki on, you guessed it, a subject that I am very much involved with. I remained neutral and cited source upon source only to have a moderator delete it. I enjoyed Wiki, just hate the moderators.

  22. This is the conversation I recently had with an admin after I was perma-blocked as a sockpuppet (I was in an edit war with an admin who then made a sockpuppet complaint against me – which was upheld by another admin – on the basis that [1] check-user showed I lived in the same city of 3.3 million people (no IP match was found) as someone he had had banned six months previously, and [2] I displayed ‘behavioral similarities’ to that person because I spelled his name incorrectly and the other user had spelled his name incorrectly, too (he went on to note that, actually, many people spelled his name incorrectly but – when taken with ‘evidence’ point 1 was ‘proof’).

    Anywho, I complained to another admin and it ended something like this (details of the situation background are deleted for brevity:

    —Summary of Previous Emails—
    I had complained to “ADMIN X” about “ADMIN Y” who had filed the complaint against me that led to my perma-block on the basis that said admin was “defending” an obscure article about a local radio host whose fan club he was a member of; filing frivolous noticeboard actions against anyone who tried to edit it.

    —Reply from “ADMIN X”—
    From: XXX@XXX.com
    Subject: Re: Wikipedia e-mail
    To: XXXX@XXX.com
    Date: Tuesday, September 22, 2009, 5:51 PM

    Wikipedia has a ‘NO OWNERSHIP’ guideline in regards to articles. No one has ownership over an article. If you cite your contributions correctly then it can’t be removed.

    —My Reply—
    Unfortunately a guideline is only meaningful if the people with the power to enforce it choose to do so. Otherwise it’s just words on paper.

    Thanks for your time,

    —Reply Back to Me From Admin X—
    Actually it’s policy. Thanks. Have a nice evening.

    —My Reply—
    “Breaking the law is illegal, therefore, no one has ever broken the law.”

    “Violating wikipedia policy is against policy, therefore, the policy has never been violated.”

    That definitely made my night – you have a nice evening, too!

    —Next—
    At this point “Admin X” trumped my perma-block by further blocking me from editing my talk page, thereby preventing my from placing an unblock request.

    SRSLY, what rocks do they find these people under? It’s like I was dealing with someone with a GED.

  23. Agree with Eric, I like the idea of Wikipedia, but the way the admins are it doesn’t work.

    I see something that’s not there and want to add it, it gets vandalized by an admin. Some Wiki that is, Wikipedia in theory: Improve the page and add info; Wikipedia in reality: Delete the page and have missing info.

  24. wikipedia administrators really ruin what is otherwise a really nice idea. they are fascists, and they definitely do have too much time on their hands. also, most of them are braindead.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.