Misplaced Pages

User:Deeceevoice: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 13:46, 3 October 2007 editFish and karate (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators36,446 editsm Changed protection level for "User:Deeceevoice": No edit warring actually taking place here - back to semiprotection (expires 12:58, 10 October 2007 (UTC))← Previous edit Latest revision as of 19:40, 21 July 2020 edit undoCommonsDelinker (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors1,013,313 edits Replacing Barnstar-rotating.gif with File:Tireless_Contributor_Barnstar.gif (by CommonsDelinker because: file renamed or replaced on Commons). 
(41 intermediate revisions by 18 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{userpage}}
<font size=130>'''Justice for the ]!'''</font>


<font size=5>'''I am deeceevoice.'''</font> ]


''FYI -- I'm not here much, so if you write me, don't be surprised if it takes a while for me to get back atcha. These days, you'll find me here and there -- or not at all. It's a combination of being bored/fed up with the place and the fact that I have a life. When I'm not working like a fieldhand, I'm in my activist mode on a variety of issues. (Yes, there ''is'' a world beyond this virtual one.)


<font size=130>'''rescuenubia.org'''</font>




<font size=130>'''sudancampaign.com'''</font>




<font size=130>'''savedarfur.org'''</font>




<font size=125>'''hurricane Katrina relief'''</font>,




<font size=5>'''I am deeceevoice.'''</font> ]

''FYI -- I'm not here much, so if you write me, don't be surprised if it takes a while for me to get back atcha. These days, you'll find me here and there -- or not at all. It's a combination of being bored/fed up with the place and the fact that I have a life. When I'm not working like a fieldhand, I'm in my activist mode on a variety of issues. (Yes, there ''is'' a world beyond this virtual one.) Increasingly, however, I'm on the Sudan/Darfur issue, working to combat the disinformation campaign being waged in the African-American community by the Nation of Islam, the leaders of which are shills for the Bashir regime, and forging alliances among stakeholders (Oromo, Dinka, Darfuris, Nubians, etc.) in reclaiming their nation, halting the Arabization/recolonization of Africa and building a new and democratic Sudan.''


=''A Caveat''= =''A Caveat''=
Line 32: Line 9:
Misplaced Pages is a technology-driven enterprise. As a result, it is skewed toward a white, male, under-50 demographic -- and any hack with a computer and Internet access can edit virtually anything. This has resulted in both misinformation and disinformation; appalling subject matter deficits; and various biases vis-à-vis subject matter treating people of color, the Third World and, most notably, African peoples. The nature of such biases runs the gamut from simply naivete and a kind of youth-driven myopia/provincialism, to a pervasive Eurocentrism/cultural bias, to racism (both mindless and calculated, subtle and blatant/virulent). I have found the project's self-policing mechanisms likewise riddled with some of the same problems, resulting in governance structures the members of which often function without integrity or accountability, who are often hostile, antagonistic, hypocritical and unjustly and unfairly punitive. And when the admins abuse their authority in the most blatant and egregious fashion, they are not held accountable -- while those guilty of lesser offenses often are dealt with excessively harshly. Misplaced Pages is a technology-driven enterprise. As a result, it is skewed toward a white, male, under-50 demographic -- and any hack with a computer and Internet access can edit virtually anything. This has resulted in both misinformation and disinformation; appalling subject matter deficits; and various biases vis-à-vis subject matter treating people of color, the Third World and, most notably, African peoples. The nature of such biases runs the gamut from simply naivete and a kind of youth-driven myopia/provincialism, to a pervasive Eurocentrism/cultural bias, to racism (both mindless and calculated, subtle and blatant/virulent). I have found the project's self-policing mechanisms likewise riddled with some of the same problems, resulting in governance structures the members of which often function without integrity or accountability, who are often hostile, antagonistic, hypocritical and unjustly and unfairly punitive. And when the admins abuse their authority in the most blatant and egregious fashion, they are not held accountable -- while those guilty of lesser offenses often are dealt with excessively harshly.


I recently was blocked after making legitimate changes to a document -- this after another, edit-warring editor, ], openly and blatantly invited others to engage in tag-team edit warring, a favorite tactic on Misplaced Pages to censor the writings of other editors who don't toe the party line of a numerically superior editorial faction. Because I focus on subects dealing primarily with black people, it has been my experience that this dynamic is an exceedingly common one on Misplaced Pages when the subject in question treats people of color. The matter at issue in this case? A cabal of editors who repeatedly have tag-team edit-warred about the insertion of adequately sourced and perfectly appropriate material on the "Negroid" nature of face of the ]. They ''refuse'' to allow any inclusion of well-documented, widely known observations of various learned writers throughout history, or that of a former Harvard professor. At first, they relegated the information to a subsection dealing with crackpot theories. Then they deleted it altogether, claiming the source, which recapitulated information (also alluded to in other articles) printed in ''The New York Times'', was unreliable. The most persistent edit warrior in this case, (again, ]), in an another article related to black people repeatedly, however, inserted preposterous information contained at the ]. On Misplaced Pages, an editor can decide some hack whose material appears on a neo-Nazi website is a reliable source, while a published Harvard professor writing in ''The New York Times'' is not. Some time ago, I was blocked after making legitimate changes to a document -- this after another, edit-warring editor openly and blatantly invited others to engage in tag-team edit warring, a favorite tactic on Misplaced Pages to censor the writings of other editors who don't toe the party line of a numerically superior editorial faction. Because I focus on subects dealing primarily with black people, it has been my experience that this dynamic is an exceedingly common one on Misplaced Pages when the subject in question treats people of color. The matter at issue in this case? A cabal of editors who repeatedly have tag-team edit-warred about the insertion of adequately sourced and perfectly appropriate material on the "Negroid" nature of the face of the ]. They ''refuse'' to allow any inclusion of well-documented, widely known observations of various learned writers throughout history, or that of a former Harvard professor. At first, they relegated the information to a subsection dealing with crackpot theories. Then they deleted it altogether, claiming the source, which recapitulated information (also alluded to in other articles) printed in ''The New York Times'', was unreliable. The very same editor in this case (whose edit note is linked to above), in an another article related to the ethnic identity of dynastic Egypt ''repeatedly'', however, edit-warred in preposterous information contained at the ]. On Misplaced Pages, an editor can decide some hack whose material appears on a neo-Nazi website is a reliable source, while a published Harvard professor writing in ''The New York Times'' is not.

Am I calling this editor a racist? Nope. Not me. Gosh, that would be impolitic! Besides, Misplaced Pages wouldn't allow that. Someone can ''ac''t like a racist, but you can't can't just up and call them one! That's a wiki no-no. I just ''named'' the editor on this page, and a wiki admin nominated my user page for deletion without even discussing the matter with me beforehand. When other editors jumped on him, including another admin, the AfD was withdrawn. But then ''another'' admin jumped on the bandwagon and unilaterally deleted my user page -- again, ''without any sort of prior notice or comment whatsoever'', puportedly objecting to my listing of links at the top of the page, saying I was using my page as a "soapbox." Anybody ever noticed all the "This user is for/against/a (insert cause or socio-political stance of choice here)" boxes plastered all over people's user pages on this website? Betcha no one's acted to consign those thousands of user pages to wiki oblivion, least of all the overzealous Aussie admin who expunged mine.


How's ''that'' for breaches of wiki etiquette? Compared to my teeny, tiny little poot (that's black southern talk for breaking wind quietly -- what? you never listened to the comedy of ]?) in the corner of a room, the precipitous and uncalled-for actions of these two admins are tantamount to someone dragging an elephant into a cocktail party and letting it hunch-and-heave a ginormous, stultifying, steaming pile on the host's antique silk oriental carpet, using the Italian linen napkins for pachyderm t.p., and then carelessly discarding them on the buffet table next to the paté.
Am I calling ] a racist? Nope. I'll let the reader draw his or her own conclusion.


An article treating the "racial controversy over ancient Egypt," after more than two years of effort by informed editors, has been gutted and trashed -- essentially by an appallingly ill-informed/misinformed, single editor -- with a decidedly eurocentrist viewpoint. The article, once provocative, interesting and enlightening, is now nothing more than an inadequate outline with a decidedly eurocentrist slant. The article is now essentially worthless. In another instance, an article treating the "racial controversy over ancient Egypt," after more than two years of effort by informed editors, has been gutted and trashed -- essentially by an appallingly ill-informed/misinformed, single editor -- with a decidedly eurocentrist viewpoint. The article, once provocative, interesting and enlightening, is now nothing more than an inadequate outline with a decidedly eurocentrist slant. The article is now essentially worthless.


The same dynamic was at work on an article about ], where essentially a team of white (certainly non-black) contributors has determined that only they are allowed to define who black people are. Contributions by black editors have been reverted (deleted) summarily and repeatedly -- wholesale -- including corrections of grammar, fact and capitalization. And one of these very same offending editors had the ''gall'' to visit my user page to ''tell'' me to stop editing, because my edits were "not helping." The same dynamic was at work on an article about ], where essentially a team of white (certainly non-black) contributors has determined that only they are allowed to define who black people are. Contributions by black editors have been reverted (deleted) summarily and repeatedly -- wholesale -- including corrections of grammar, fact and capitalization. And one of these very same offending editors had the ''gall'' to visit my user page to ''tell'' me to stop editing, because my edits were "not helping."

In response to my recent block in the matter of the sphinx article, I received the following e-mail from a banned Misplaced Pages user. It is excerpted and reproduced below with the writer's permission.

<blockquote>Anyone who belongs to the dominant block of opinion on any subject can get anyone else blocked. Misplaced Pages has no policies, applied consistently.</blockquote>

<blockquote>All the admins who talk on En-l openly admit counting any shred of personal fairness as mattering less than developing Misplaced Pages as they wish. Blocking of only 1 side when 2 sides have done exactly the same thing that the block is supposed to have been for, is routine. It's what happened to me, and claiming to have any rights against a biased 2-day block actually was the offence that got me permablocked, after only 5 weeks' membership. Look at all these:</blockquote>

<blockquote>a voice from within Misplaced Pages's own system describes how the ArbCom and dispute resolution systems are rigged with discretionary catch-alls that always enable admin to win on how force of group numbers dictates Misplaced Pages pages' content this is actually called "don't bother reporting abusive admins."</blockquote>

<blockquote>I was wary of how the umpiring of pages the whole world can fight over could possibly work well, but I was drawn into Misplaced Pages by a friend who was briefly (and no longer is, already!) having good experiences with sharing his medical concerns on a couple of pages on medical subjects. My Wiki name was Tern, and here are 2 administrators saying to me
saying "You are not entitled to anything" and "Misplaced Pages is not a democracy."</blockquote>

<blockquote>On the nature of Misplaced Pages: </blockquote>
<blockquote>And a former admin, leaving Misplaced Pages just recently, on 6 Oct 06:
"Too many admins whose first course is to insult a new user in order to see if they get a 'reaction' so that they can spank the new user for talking back to an admin. I've seen too many admins block accounts for infinite duration on flimsy evidence or mere whim.</blockquote>

<blockquote>I've seen more accusations thrown around of someone being a "sockpuppet" of another user. Time and again, I looked through the edits, and I didn't see it. Instead, what I saw were users who were systematically hounded until they finally broke down and broke the civility rules, and then as an afterthought someone came up and said "oh, it doesn't matter, they were a sockpuppet of X anyways", thereby removing all culpability on the part of the abusive users who had spent time hounding and abusing the newbie....</blockquote>
<blockquote>"The Wiki is broken. ... We, the admins of wikipedia, broke it. We broke it by being stuck-up jerks. We broke it by thinking we are better than normal editors, by getting full of ourselves."</blockquote>
::*
::*

<blockquote>We're actually developing a reputation as a place of arrogance and nastiness, a place of heavy-handed thugishness, a place where people treat each other quite badly. That's bad for the project.</blockquote>

<blockquote>"You are not the only one who has had problems with Misplaced Pages taking sides in a dispute, and being blatantly unfair to the other side without even giving them a chance to defend themselves." from FAMSecretSociety, a Yahoo group: "Yes ... this is my opinion of Misplaced Pages.
It suppresses anything that may be considered 'more than marginally controversial'. It's definitely in the same boat as the mainstream media without any shadow of a doubt. " - the forum of the British anti-ID cards site http://www.1984brigade.com/</blockquote>

<blockquote>"Of late I've noticed that some independent contributions have been either radically edited or censored. I've not had time to check articles on 9/11, the London Bombings, the assault on Falluja etc, but judging from the way content was edited promptly out of articles on SSRIs, schizophrenia and Asperger's, there definitely seem to be operatives in place ready to clamp down on anything that may cast doubt on establishment canards." from Medialens, http://www.medialens.org/board/</blockquote>


-------- --------
I recently revisited ], once a featured article. It's now an utter mess and has been de-featured (is that a word?). It's been so whitewashed, so gutted, the subject is barely recognizable. I've reinserted some language here and there. I simply don't have the patience to read the entire thing, let alone attempt a thorough rewrite. Betcha this article is virtually the only one in cyberspace that seeks to portray jazz as a "color-blind" phenomenon, de-Africanizing its roots, and with more illustrations and examples featuring white people (including a list of ''all-white and Jewish'' bandleaders from the 1920s)!!! A classic case of white wannabeism/cultural appropriation. I recently revisited ], once a featured article. It's now an utter mess and has been de-featured (is that a word?). It's been so whitewashed, so gutted, the subject is barely recognizable. I've reinserted some language here and there. I simply don't have the patience to read the entire thing, let alone attempt a thorough rewrite. Betcha this article is virtually the only one in cyberspace that seeks to portray jazz as a "color-blind" phenomenon, de-Africanizing its roots, and with more illustrations and examples featuring white people (including a list of ''all-white and Jewish'' bandleaders from the 1920s)!!! A classic case of Jewish/white black-wannabeism/cultural appropriation.


But that doesn't stop it from being at the top of the list of sources on the subject when you Google it. Frightening. But that doesn't stop it from being at the top of the list of sources on the subject when you Google it. Frightening.
Line 93: Line 41:
== If You Don't Mind The Interjection == == If You Don't Mind The Interjection ==
{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};" {| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ] |rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
|rowspan="2" | |rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Original Barnstar''' |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Original Barnstar'''
Line 101: Line 49:


{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};" {| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ] |rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
|rowspan="2" | |rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Tireless Contributor Barnstar''' |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Tireless Contributor Barnstar'''
Line 117: Line 65:
while continuing to contribute to Misplaced Pages. ] 18:08, 10 August 2007 (UTC) while continuing to contribute to Misplaced Pages. ] 18:08, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
|} |}

==Shouting Out==
I am sorry I missed you - I see you have not signed on for a long time. I worked hard on the now useless article on Black People; for a while it looked promising but mediocrity is insidiously invasive on this site. I find it to be so ruthlessly eurocentric - it is certainly toxic and exhausting for folks. I applaud you for all your work and your tenacity. Peace ] (]) 07:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC)


==You always inspired me==
I miss you a lot. You always inspired me. I've come back to give another shot at fixing Race and Intelligence. (It's still terrible) I'll be thinking of you while I work.

] (]) 16:33, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 19:40, 21 July 2020

Misplaced Pages editor
This is a Wikipedia user page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Deeceevoice.

I am deeceevoice.

File:Chidongo.JPG
NOMO. The Ancestors.

FYI -- I'm not here much, so if you write me, don't be surprised if it takes a while for me to get back atcha. These days, you'll find me here and there -- or not at all. It's a combination of being bored/fed up with the place and the fact that I have a life. When I'm not working like a fieldhand, I'm in my activist mode on a variety of issues. (Yes, there is a world beyond this virtual one.)

A Caveat

Misplaced Pages is a technology-driven enterprise. As a result, it is skewed toward a white, male, under-50 demographic -- and any hack with a computer and Internet access can edit virtually anything. This has resulted in both misinformation and disinformation; appalling subject matter deficits; and various biases vis-à-vis subject matter treating people of color, the Third World and, most notably, African peoples. The nature of such biases runs the gamut from simply naivete and a kind of youth-driven myopia/provincialism, to a pervasive Eurocentrism/cultural bias, to racism (both mindless and calculated, subtle and blatant/virulent). I have found the project's self-policing mechanisms likewise riddled with some of the same problems, resulting in governance structures the members of which often function without integrity or accountability, who are often hostile, antagonistic, hypocritical and unjustly and unfairly punitive. And when the admins abuse their authority in the most blatant and egregious fashion, they are not held accountable -- while those guilty of lesser offenses often are dealt with excessively harshly.

Some time ago, I was blocked after making legitimate changes to a document -- this after another, edit-warring editor openly and blatantly invited others to engage in tag-team edit warring, a favorite tactic on Misplaced Pages to censor the writings of other editors who don't toe the party line of a numerically superior editorial faction. Because I focus on subects dealing primarily with black people, it has been my experience that this dynamic is an exceedingly common one on Misplaced Pages when the subject in question treats people of color. The matter at issue in this case? A cabal of editors who repeatedly have tag-team edit-warred about the insertion of adequately sourced and perfectly appropriate material on the "Negroid" nature of the face of the Great Sphinx of Giza. They refuse to allow any inclusion of well-documented, widely known observations of various learned writers throughout history, or that of a former Harvard professor. At first, they relegated the information to a subsection dealing with crackpot theories. Then they deleted it altogether, claiming the source, which recapitulated information (also alluded to in other articles) printed in The New York Times, was unreliable. The very same editor in this case (whose edit note is linked to above), in an another article related to the ethnic identity of dynastic Egypt repeatedly, however, edit-warred in preposterous information contained at the Stormfront website. On Misplaced Pages, an editor can decide some hack whose material appears on a neo-Nazi website is a reliable source, while a published Harvard professor writing in The New York Times is not.

Am I calling this editor a racist? Nope. Not me. Gosh, that would be impolitic! Besides, Misplaced Pages wouldn't allow that. Someone can act like a racist, but you can't can't just up and call them one! That's a wiki no-no. I just named the editor on this page, and a wiki admin nominated my user page for deletion without even discussing the matter with me beforehand. When other editors jumped on him, including another admin, the AfD was withdrawn. But then another admin jumped on the bandwagon and unilaterally deleted my user page -- again, without any sort of prior notice or comment whatsoever, puportedly objecting to my listing of links at the top of the page, saying I was using my page as a "soapbox." Anybody ever noticed all the "This user is for/against/a (insert cause or socio-political stance of choice here)" boxes plastered all over people's user pages on this website? Betcha no one's acted to consign those thousands of user pages to wiki oblivion, least of all the overzealous Aussie admin who expunged mine.

How's that for breaches of wiki etiquette? Compared to my teeny, tiny little poot (that's black southern talk for breaking wind quietly -- what? you never listened to the comedy of Richard Pryor?) in the corner of a room, the precipitous and uncalled-for actions of these two admins are tantamount to someone dragging an elephant into a cocktail party and letting it hunch-and-heave a ginormous, stultifying, steaming pile on the host's antique silk oriental carpet, using the Italian linen napkins for pachyderm t.p., and then carelessly discarding them on the buffet table next to the paté.

In another instance, an article treating the "racial controversy over ancient Egypt," after more than two years of effort by informed editors, has been gutted and trashed -- essentially by an appallingly ill-informed/misinformed, single editor -- with a decidedly eurocentrist viewpoint. The article, once provocative, interesting and enlightening, is now nothing more than an inadequate outline with a decidedly eurocentrist slant. The article is now essentially worthless.

The same dynamic was at work on an article about Black people, where essentially a team of white (certainly non-black) contributors has determined that only they are allowed to define who black people are. Contributions by black editors have been reverted (deleted) summarily and repeatedly -- wholesale -- including corrections of grammar, fact and capitalization. And one of these very same offending editors had the gall to visit my user page to tell me to stop editing, because my edits were "not helping."


I recently revisited Jazz, once a featured article. It's now an utter mess and has been de-featured (is that a word?). It's been so whitewashed, so gutted, the subject is barely recognizable. I've reinserted some language here and there. I simply don't have the patience to read the entire thing, let alone attempt a thorough rewrite. Betcha this article is virtually the only one in cyberspace that seeks to portray jazz as a "color-blind" phenomenon, de-Africanizing its roots, and with more illustrations and examples featuring white people (including a list of all-white and Jewish bandleaders from the 1920s)!!! A classic case of Jewish/white black-wannabeism/cultural appropriation.

But that doesn't stop it from being at the top of the list of sources on the subject when you Google it. Frightening.

Misplaced Pages is a f***ing runaway freight train headed straight to hell. It's downright and despicably dangerous.


In short, Misplaced Pages is all too often an unreliable source riddled with systemic bias.

Personally, I do not believe Misplaced Pages is an effective venue for treating fairly or accurately subjects related to African peoples. Misplaced Pages is a noble idea, but inherently and fatally flawed. It has its pluses, but plenty of minuses as well. Don't believe the hype and proceed with caution.

So, in short, dear reader, I give you fair warning:


DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU SEE IN PRINT.


If You Don't Mind The Interjection

The Original Barnstar
For grinding it out and making your voice heard Docjay8406 16:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Two and a half years and 15,000 edits? Yeah.

Someone should have given this to you by now. Docjay8406 16:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

The Purple Star
I award you this purple star for dealing with numerous personal attacks from others diplomatically

while continuing to contribute to Misplaced Pages. Wiki Raja 18:08, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Shouting Out

I am sorry I missed you - I see you have not signed on for a long time. I worked hard on the now useless article on Black People; for a while it looked promising but mediocrity is insidiously invasive on this site. I find it to be so ruthlessly eurocentric - it is certainly toxic and exhausting for folks. I applaud you for all your work and your tenacity. Peace VaniNY (talk) 07:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC)


You always inspired me

I miss you a lot. You always inspired me. I've come back to give another shot at fixing Race and Intelligence. (It's still terrible) I'll be thinking of you while I work.

futurebird (talk) 16:33, 6 September 2017 (UTC)