Slashdot Mirror

Not to be confused with Heroes For Hire which is politically incorrect for other reasons

/troll

This is a disgrace if true. Basically this sounds like the 'clique' on the mailing list are in control *and* have the support of the foundation. There seems to be no discussion on preventing this. I would say the discussion and exposure of lists like this is very important.

Woah, I see this is your first time encountering Wikipedia.

Go try to post something that the mod-mob doesn't like. Like, say, a Webcomic article (that's already been discussed several places.) Or, try to link to a site that follows all the guidelines, but the random twit who happens upon it decides that you can't do that, and since he owns Wikipedia, you had better stop stop stop you bad bad man.

I ran into something similar trying to add two links to a Warhammer 40k article -- a robot (which are apparently A-OK if the clique is using them, but not you, you bad bad man) started removing the entire edit because one of the URLs was to a banned domain. Then, after trying to fight off the robo-stupid for a while, I started getting random threats from the robot's handler. Later, once I worked around the dumb, another self-stylized mod-mob member removed them again, sending me a threatening post on my user:talk page, quoting nonexistent policies that ban "Fan Created Sites" and incorrectly quoting the Foreign Language Link policy.

Pointing this out to him, of course, didn't help. After all, he owns Wikipedia, and I'm a bad bad man.

So yeah. There are cliques in control on Wikipedia. They are legion. And they are stupid.

The only place I've seen worse cliquey-admin abuse is Deviantart, wherein it's A-OK to draw "Sonic the Hedgehog" fanart -- and even sell posters of such -- but don't you dare post any files, with permission, following the Deviantart rules for such (which include re-reposting the art as a zip file containing a "signed text file" granting yourself permission to do so), of art of your own original creations being drawn by someone else.

I.e., Fanart. Of your own character. Which isn't ok. But making money off of ripped off Sonic the Hedgehog stuff is just super.

This is a disgrace if true. Basically this sounds like the 'clique' on the mailing list are in control *and* have the support of the foundation. There seems to be no discussion on preventing this. I would say the discussion and exposure of lists like this is very important.

Woah, I see this is your first time encountering Wikipedia.

Go try to post something that the mod-mob doesn't like. Like, say, a Webcomic article (that's already been discussed several places.) Or, try to link to a site that follows all the guidelines, but the random twit who happens upon it decides that you can't do that, and since he owns Wikipedia, you had better stop stop stop you bad bad man.

I ran into something similar trying to add two links to a Warhammer 40k article -- a robot (which are apparently A-OK if the clique is using them, but not you, you bad bad man) started removing the entire edit because one of the URLs was to a banned domain. Then, after trying to fight off the robo-stupid for a while, I started getting random threats from the robot's handler. Later, once I worked around the dumb, another self-stylized mod-mob member removed them again, sending me a threatening post on my user:talk page, quoting nonexistent policies that ban "Fan Created Sites" and incorrectly quoting the Foreign Language Link policy.

Pointing this out to him, of course, didn't help. After all, he owns Wikipedia, and I'm a bad bad man.

So yeah. There are cliques in control on Wikipedia. They are legion. And they are stupid.

The only place I've seen worse cliquey-admin abuse is Deviantart, wherein it's A-OK to draw "Sonic the Hedgehog" fanart -- and even sell posters of such -- but don't you dare post any files, with permission, following the Deviantart rules for such (which include re-reposting the art as a zip file containing a "signed text file" granting yourself permission to do so), of art of your own original creations being drawn by someone else.

I.e., Fanart. Of your own character. Which isn't ok. But making money off of ripped off Sonic the Hedgehog stuff is just super.

This is a disgrace if true. Basically this sounds like the 'clique' on the mailing list are in control *and* have the support of the foundation. There seems to be no discussion on preventing this. I would say the discussion and exposure of lists like this is very important.

Woah, I see this is your first time encountering Wikipedia.

Go try to post something that the mod-mob doesn't like. Like, say, a Webcomic article (that's already been discussed several places.) Or, try to link to a site that follows all the guidelines, but the random twit who happens upon it decides that you can't do that, and since he owns Wikipedia, you had better stop stop stop you bad bad man.

I ran into something similar trying to add two links to a Warhammer 40k article -- a robot (which are apparently A-OK if the clique is using them, but not you, you bad bad man) started removing the entire edit because one of the URLs was to a banned domain. Then, after trying to fight off the robo-stupid for a while, I started getting random threats from the robot's handler. Later, once I worked around the dumb, another self-stylized mod-mob member removed them again, sending me a threatening post on my user:talk page, quoting nonexistent policies that ban "Fan Created Sites" and incorrectly quoting the Foreign Language Link policy.

Pointing this out to him, of course, didn't help. After all, he owns Wikipedia, and I'm a bad bad man.

So yeah. There are cliques in control on Wikipedia. They are legion. And they are stupid.

The only place I've seen worse cliquey-admin abuse is Deviantart, wherein it's A-OK to draw "Sonic the Hedgehog" fanart -- and even sell posters of such -- but don't you dare post any files, with permission, following the Deviantart rules for such (which include re-reposting the art as a zip file containing a "signed text file" granting yourself permission to do so), of art of your own original creations being drawn by someone else.

I.e., Fanart. Of your own character. Which isn't ok. But making money off of ripped off Sonic the Hedgehog stuff is just super.

"All comics must go through articles for deletion, where the community must decide."

Don't worry, the webcomics community thought of that too, and broke the rule about not making your point by actually proving it makes not a whit of difference. One author put his comic up for deletion, making ten sock puppets in order to argue with each other, and no-one battered an eyelid. Someone else did the same thing in the same VfD but argued 'keep' and got caught. There's plenty more cases where the community has decided to delete notable comics just because the Wikipedia entry doesn't make a proper case (I believe the appropriate response there is 'improve article'). When the most prominent webcomics award is deleted from Wikipedia for being 'not notable', you know you have a problem, as you do when one of the early driving forces behind the Wikipedia Webcomics project backflips a year later and decides that Wikipedia will never come around and that the webcomics community would be better served by making their own wiki.

It's almost common knowledge in the webcomics community that Wikipedia is a waste of time, but it's great for looking up comic book minutiae.

"All comics must go through articles for deletion, where the community must decide."

Don't worry, the webcomics community thought of that too, and broke the rule about not making your point by actually proving it makes not a whit of difference. One author put his comic up for deletion, making ten sock puppets in order to argue with each other, and no-one battered an eyelid. Someone else did the same thing in the same VfD but argued 'keep' and got caught. There's plenty more cases where the community has decided to delete notable comics just because the Wikipedia entry doesn't make a proper case (I believe the appropriate response there is 'improve article'). When the most prominent webcomics award is deleted from Wikipedia for being 'not notable', you know you have a problem, as you do when one of the early driving forces behind the Wikipedia Webcomics project backflips a year later and decides that Wikipedia will never come around and that the webcomics community would be better served by making their own wiki.

It's almost common knowledge in the webcomics community that Wikipedia is a waste of time, but it's great for looking up comic book minutiae.

A friend of mine tried City of Heroes/Villains on his MacBook and was highly impressed by its performance.

Will words that aren't notable be put up for AFD, like at Wikipedia? Funny, someone predicted that just yesterday

I'm not surprised to see this article here, but if you click here you'll find a good disection of the piece. Here's a small snippet that summarises the post:

Boxer's research would barely qualify for a Freshman Comp essay, much less a piece of journalism in a newspaper of record. She seems to have drawn her information off of several Comics Journal articles, read Understanding Comics and Reinventing Comics, and looked at the Web Cartoonists Choice Awards.

Well, at least she dipped her toe into webcomics before declaring it a failed experiment.

I found that blog post (yes! It's a blog post! Oh noes!) much more interesting (and informative as well as correct) then the actual news paper article itself.

And, of course, if we're counting up other weaknesses of Superman, there's always kryptonite, magic, and Superdickery (really, it's work safe).

The webcomic review & criticism blog Websnark.com has some interesting entries looking at Blank Label's creation, its choice of tagline, and the webcomic syndicate from which its members departed.

The webcomic review & criticism blog Websnark.com has some interesting entries looking at Blank Label's creation, its choice of tagline, and the webcomic syndicate from which its members departed.

The webcomic review & criticism blog Websnark.com has some interesting entries looking at Blank Label's creation, its choice of tagline, and the webcomic syndicate from which its members departed.

The webcomic review & criticism blog Websnark.com has some interesting entries looking at Blank Label's creation, its choice of tagline, and the webcomic syndicate from which its members departed.