Difference between revisions of "User:PeterKa"

Revision as of 23:12, December 16, 2013

Here is the user page that got me banned from Wikipedia. In May, there was a huge discussion about it and it was finally rev-deleted. A feminist oversighter blocked me a couple of weeks later. At the time, there was some handwaving and a lame rationale about edit warring. But I think it is safe to say that my block and ban were generally understood as ideological. Here my Arbcom appeal.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-Here is the user page that got me banned from Wikipedia. In May, there was a huge discussion about it and it was finally rev-deleted. A notoriously feminist oversighter (Ponyo) blocked me a couple of weeks later. She give a lame rationale about edit warring. But I think it is safe to say that my block and ban were generally understood as the political purge of a long-time contributer.
+[[User:PeterKa/Filipacchi | Here]] is the user page that got me banned from Wikipedia. In May, there was a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive797 huge discussion about it] and it was finally rev-deleted. A feminist oversighter blocked me a couple of weeks later. At the time, there was some handwaving and a lame rationale about edit warring. But I think it is safe to say that my block and ban were generally understood as ideological. [http://www.conservapedia.com/User:PeterKa/Arbcom Here] my Arbcom appeal.
-<center>
-'''This is an un-user page. It is not to be confused with a user page, or actual encyclopedic content.'''
-</center>
-[[File:Amanda_Filipacchi_portrait.jpg|thumb|right|Time to get it straight, Wikipedia: This is an American novelist. Don't ghettoize her as an American woman novelist.]]
-==Restoring human dignity: A modest proposal==
-I recently perused [[:Category:Humans]] and I noticed a shocking oversight: [[Amanda Filipacchi]] is not in it. As you may or may not be aware, Filipacchi is at the center of a Wikipedia bruhaha I like to refer to as [[:Category:Boogyman]]. In various op-eds and letters to the editor, she has explained how Wikipedians have tried to deprive her of her noble "American novelist" category identifier and substitute a ghettoized "American woman novelist" identifier. Must we rob her of her basic human dignity as well?
-To review how this crisis has developed so far:
-*"[http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/opinion/sunday/wikipedias-sexism-toward-female-novelists.html Wikipedia’s Sexism Toward Female Novelists]". On April 24, Amanda blows the lid off recategorization activity at Wikipedia. In a ''New York Times'' op-ed, she explains that the issue is of vital interest to readers because employers routinely page through this absurdly overgrown 4,000-element category when deciding "whom to hire, or honor, or read" and "might not even notice that the first page of it includes far more men than women." Amanda is known for her humor writing. But don't laugh at this line; It is possible that she may have meant it seriously. To save you trouble of reading it article, the gist of this article is that diffusing categories is the new sexism.
-*"[http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/opinion/sunday/wikipedias-sexism.html?_r=0 Wikipedia’s Sexism]", On April 27, the ''NYT'' publishes an second (2nd!) op-ed that says almost exactly the same thing as the first. Why would a newspaper publish essentially the same material twice within three days? Well, it certainly isn't because Amanda's daddy is head of magazine publisher [[Hachette Filipacchi Media U.S.]], that's for sure. It must be because there were 22 edits to her bio in the 24 hours after the first op-ed was published.
-*"[http://www.salon.com/2013/04/29/wikipedias_shame/ Wikipedia’s shame]" Andrew Leonard of ''Salon'' depicts Amanda as the victim of vengeful Wikipedians.
-*"[http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2013/apr/29/wikipedia-women-problem/ Wikipedia’s Women Problem]" James Gliek of the ''New York Review of Books'' blames it all on category maven [[User:Johnpacklambert|Johnpacklambert]].
-*"[http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/04/sexism-on-wikipedia-is-not-the-work-of-a-single-misguided-editor/275405/ Sexism on Wikipedia Is Not the Work of 'a Single Misguided Editor']" On April 30 in ''The Atlantic'', Amanada exposes seven editors who moved bios from [[:Category:American novelists]] to [[:Category:American women novelists]]. Have you no shame, Wikipedia?
-__________________________________________________________________<br/>
-<small>OK, I have kept you in suspense long enough. So why is this an un-user page rather than user page? Well, you see I have written satires on other subjects and posted them on this page. But not everyone appreciated them, and the page has been deleted before. Yet it continues to ambulate in a Zombie-like fashion. So hurry up, read it, and tell your friends before it gets deleted again.</small>

Difference between revisions of "User:PeterKa"

Revision as of 23:12, December 16, 2013

Navigation menu

Search