I want to know if you are a wiki-vandal. I edited it for a little bit and found pretty quickly that vandals are given extremely wide latitude. I gave up because I got tired of the same guys beating the hell out of articles I wrote with virtually no consequences. They get a couple of warnings, but essentially its hard to get banned. Certain IP addresses (like universities) are even harder to ban because it would effectively shut out legitimate users.
Some vandalism is useless because its something stupid like “Ken Griffey is gay” or just outwardly racist. No thought, no creativity. I can’t respect that. But some vandals are so good that their stuff persists in articles for quite a while. or its just hilarious to read for the few minutes or hours its up. Are you a creative vandal? I hope you’ll share it.
Twice, actually. I’m not particularly proud of it, but there it is. I went onto the character page for Carrie Bradshaw from Sex and the City and wrote that in the season finale, it was revealed that she was actually a lesbian (which obviously wasn’t the case).
I also went onto the page for Wham’s “Last Christmas” and wrote something along the lines of “This song is one of the greatest cultural achievements of our time”.
Both vandalisms were fixed within a matter of hours. Though I did sort of make up for my childish vandalism by un-vandalising (new word!) two pages.
On a page for some racehorse, someone had put, in all caps, something like “yay [horse’s name], yay [horse’s name], boooooooooo [some other horse’s name], you suck.” I deleted it.
On the page for “Terrance and Philip”, someone had written, right in the middle of a coherent paragraph “Philp has farty pants OMG HA HA”. I fixed that as well.
I think I’ve posted this before. My buddies were arguing about who was the USA woman who “flashed” the crowd after she scored a goal in the World Cup. They bet a six pack, and the one who was saying it was Mia Hamm edited her page and “won” the bet.
Nope, sorry. You must now fill in a minimum of 15 “this article is a stub” entries using original research. Until you complete your task, the WikiBird will poop on your car. Daily.
When it looked like the article on a mate’s band was about to be deleted for a lack of notability, we had a go at some silly trivia, probably not funny to people other than my friends though.
I’d like to hear more details before I pass judgement. What exactly was the repeated vandalism that the OP faced? I’ve unfortunately seen cases of things like “I keep trying to explain how the CIA was behind the Kennedy assassination but all of those damn vandals keep deleting my posts.”
I wonder what the sneakiest kind of vandalism might have been, and how long it took for someone to catch it. Yeah they can keep checking their watchlists and visiting everything that underwent some editing, zip in, look for the smoking gun and wipe it clean away, but perhaps you were more subtle than that in your vandalism. Ergo:
Years ago, some pirates were privateers,
operating with a letter of marque which was
used in authorized attacks on ships flying the colors of
sworn enemies of the issuing nation. Privateers
usually were allowed to keep a certain percentage of the
cut of the plunder, with the rest
kept for delivery to the issuing nation.
[It’s 11:30 at night, I’m about to go to bed, that’s as good as I can do on short notice, so I assume the gag is pretty obvious]
I used to write or update pages of former Members of Congress. Mostly stuff about election results, election opponents, nonsense like that. Most of what you get is some idiot who decides to post random stupidity like “Congressman X also hates black people”. Once a vandal decides he gets under your skin, he keeps coming back. Those warnings WP gives you to try and stop it are oh so helpful.
Not realizing, at the time, that changing “facts” at Wikipedia had a certain protocol, I visited, and change the misinformation which was in the article. Hey! I knew more than the info that was there. Of course, it got reversed. I didn’t bother to read the instructions. Later, I went back and posted it properly, adding cites, etc.
The mindless teen-aged(mostly) vandals are really, REALLY a problems. I’ve contributed to 10-15 articles, and they get vandalized weekly. Sometimes daily. Mostly things are “Josh sucks” etc.
I don’t vandalize articles myself, but sometimes I just have to stop and admire another’s work of vandalism for a minute or two before reverting it. When Benedict XVI was named Pope, someone edited his page to show a picture of Supreme Chancellor Palpatine from the Star Wars prequels. I lol’d, and in the time that it took me to lol, someone else beat me to reverting the edit.
I read somewhere that the average lifespan of a vandalism on Wikipedia is somewhere in the neighborhood of eight minutes. Not only do you have various Wikipedia editors roaming around protecting their babies, but some editors also employ automated “bots” which sift through updates looking for anything that is generally indicative of a vandalism, flagging or correcting articles as it finds them.
I remember there was a thread here a while back detailing a bit of wiki vandalism. It was an article about some small obscure village somewhere, and after a one sentence generic description, it ended with “…and a few dipsticks” or something like that. I found it amusing anyway, that not only was there an article about this village that didn’t really have anything notable about it, but someone found the time to vandalize it.
They did one on the title page of White Dwarf (fantasy hobby magazine) about 21 years ago. Staff disgruntled at the actions of the new owner managed to slip “Sod Off Brian Ansell” past the censors.
I have corrected vandalism, and contributed much (some of which has been removed even though I don’t think it deserved to be). I have never vandalised anything myself. I can appreciate some that is particularly funny, but that’s rare, it’s almost always virtual graffiti.
