Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-02-11/News and notes: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Background on Super Mario Problem
No edit summary
Line 16: Line 16:


:Wikipedia edits where the Super Mario Problem has been discussed:[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArbitration%2FRequests%2FCase%2FTimidGuy_ban_appeal%2FProposed_decision&diff=477929027&oldid=477928842][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArbitration%2FRequests%2FCase%2FTimidGuy_ban_appeal%2FProposed_decision&diff=477947689&oldid=477946760][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArbitration%2FRequests%2FCase%2FTimidGuy_ban_appeal%2FProposed_decision&diff=477947689&oldid=477946760][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jclemens/Not_a_Wikipedian][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArbitration%2FRequests%2FCase%2FDoncram%2FProposed_decision&diff=542129553&oldid=542127670] --[[User:Guy Macon|Guy Macon]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon|talk]]) 05:20, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
:Wikipedia edits where the Super Mario Problem has been discussed:[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArbitration%2FRequests%2FCase%2FTimidGuy_ban_appeal%2FProposed_decision&diff=477929027&oldid=477928842][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArbitration%2FRequests%2FCase%2FTimidGuy_ban_appeal%2FProposed_decision&diff=477947689&oldid=477946760][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArbitration%2FRequests%2FCase%2FTimidGuy_ban_appeal%2FProposed_decision&diff=477947689&oldid=477946760][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jclemens/Not_a_Wikipedian][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArbitration%2FRequests%2FCase%2FDoncram%2FProposed_decision&diff=542129553&oldid=542127670] --[[User:Guy Macon|Guy Macon]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon|talk]]) 05:20, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

* Re:Wifione. None of this is particularly new. Particular credit to the illustrious Col. Warden who noted during the RFA: ''"I'm concerned by this pro-forma behaviour too. Early in his career, the candidate was accused of being a reappearance of a prolific sockmaster. I would expect a smart person of this kind to work their passage up to admin status by perfunctory activity of the kind that we see. My impression is that there are still some unresolved COI issues around The Indian Institute of Planning and Management. Colonel Warden (talk) 2:39 am, 14 September 2010, Tuesday (4 years, 5 months, 1 day ago) (UTC−7)"'' — Myself, I found Wifione to be a very reasonable person in general administrative sorts of discussions, although I admittedly never ventured within a 10 mile radius of their editing areas of interest. [[User:Carrite|Carrite]] ([[User talk:Carrite|talk]]) 16:45, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:45, 13 February 2015

Discuss this story

The IP mentioned in the Jimmy Wales article has been blocked for trolling. The comment was his/her only visible contribution. — Brianhe (talk) 14:57, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see the UAE complaints as totally valid, but not this one. This isn't the Israeli government promoting itself, its a university that happens to be located in its boundaries, yeah it's public, but universities usually operate pretty independently of their governments interests. The fact that the IP is blocked has nothing to do with the validity of the complaint, however. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 15:22, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Super Mario Problem... I like this phrase. I would suppose then, a 'crat is Fire Mario? What an interesting comparison. --DSA510 Pls No Pineapple 17:54, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • I feel that the Wifione section understates what's going on with the case. While sockpuppetry is a factor, I think the bigger issues Arbitrators are trying to address is the editing. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 23:13, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The headline One editor faces likely ban for work on Wikipedia; another awarded $1 million makes it sound like the second editor was awarded $1 million for doing the same thing the first editor was banned for. --Guy Macon (talk) 01:49, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Background: In Mario Brothers, When Small Mario takes a hit, he dies. When Super Mario takes the same hit he turns into Small Mario. The obvious analogy would be a case where when a regular user misbehaves badly enough he is site banned, but when an administrator misbehaves in the exact same way he is desysoped and becomes a regular user.
There is also an even larger and far rarer Giant Mario, who can walk over and destroy everything in his path, including the largest and most powerful enemies. Giant Mario has a time limit after which he reverts to being Super Mario, but can be killed with great difficulty. The analogy here is left as an exercise for the reader.
And no, I didn't know any of this before tonight. I looked it up on mariowiki.com. :)
Wikipedia edits where the Super Mario Problem has been discussed:[1][2][3][4][5] --Guy Macon (talk) 05:20, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Re:Wifione. None of this is particularly new. Particular credit to the illustrious Col. Warden who noted during the RFA: "I'm concerned by this pro-forma behaviour too. Early in his career, the candidate was accused of being a reappearance of a prolific sockmaster. I would expect a smart person of this kind to work their passage up to admin status by perfunctory activity of the kind that we see. My impression is that there are still some unresolved COI issues around The Indian Institute of Planning and Management. Colonel Warden (talk) 2:39 am, 14 September 2010, Tuesday (4 years, 5 months, 1 day ago) (UTC−7)" — Myself, I found Wifione to be a very reasonable person in general administrative sorts of discussions, although I admittedly never ventured within a 10 mile radius of their editing areas of interest. Carrite (talk) 16:45, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]