Wikipedia vs Congressional Staffers [Update]

There has been quite a bit of recent reporting on the recent troubles between Wikipedia and certain Congressional staffers. In response, abdulzis mentions that "an RFC, Wikipedia's mediation method to deal with 'disharmonious users', has been opened to take action against US Congressional staffers who repeatedly blank content and engage in revert wars and slanderous or libelous behavior which violates Wikiepdia code. The IP ranges of US Congress have been currently blocked, but only for a week until the issue can be addressed more directly."

trouble with the little ones

[Niartov]

Well children if you cannot play nice we are just going to have to take this away

Congressional Trolls

[Council]

Congressional trolls. This idea amuses me deeply.

I wonder if any of the trolls we've got on here are working for Congress.

Perhaps, somehow, Natalie Portman is a matter of national security.

I have no knowledge...

[IAAP]

nor do I condone such behavior from my staff, myself, or anyone. This was done by some rogue elements that were too aggressive in their desire to set the facts straight. There will be a thorough investigation into this matter and the appropriate action will be taken.

--[insert congresscritter's name here]

Re:Congressional Trolls

[Too many errors, bai]

Governmental Nimrods Association of America?

Beaverl Attack: Wikipedia has NEVER been great...

[nweaver]

Just look at this past entry for "Beaver" (now corrected, but Wikipedia's history allows us to see it in the full glory)

Beaver [wikipedia.org]

"Beavers explosively attack people with their menacing teeth. They are the most deadly animals alive."

Re:Congressional Trolls

[PFI_Optix]

Perhaps, somehow, Natalie Portman is a matter of national security.

"And in a recent Freedom of Information Act, these images of Natalie Portman were released..."

Ahh crap they blacked out all the good parts...

What a ludicrous assertion!

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if any of the trolls we've got on here are working for Congress.

That's a pretty outlandish theory you have there! We^H^HThey would never consider monitoring Slashdot, let alone posting comments to it.

White House

[graystar]

In other news, it seems The White House I.P addresses will remain unblocked as users there are still struggling to find wiki. Allegedly there have been unconfirmed reports of a "white out" scandal, where public money has been frivolously spent on white out and computer screens. No one has yet named the culprit.

Re:Beaver Attack: Wikipedia has NEVER been great.

[mooingyak]

And the people who removed that line are trying to suppress the truth about beavers.

Re:Congress blocked :P

[Anonymous Coward]

And now Congress will vote to make freely-editable online encyclopedias illegal. Freedom of speech loses in a landslide. :D

After their IPs posted on slashdot? They'll vote to make port scanning illegal...:p

Everybody's doing it!

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/12/16 [penny-arcade.com]

Re:I have no knowledge...

[kfg]

This was done by some rogue elements that were too aggressive in their desire to . . .

rid me of that meddlesome priest. Now, where did I put those two, adorable little princes?

KFG

Re:Congressional Trolls

[spungebob]

Make that "Goverment Idiots Association of America". Then I can catch all of the morons with one single regex ("*IAA")

Re:Beaverl Attack: Wikipedia has NEVER been great.

[meringuoid]

"Beavers explosively attack people with their menacing teeth. They are the most deadly animals alive."

I'm particularly amused by the note in subscript after that remarkable claim:

'Citation needed.'

Which gives me a mental image of a wikipedia editor like some genial dusty old university professor saying 'Not that we don't believe you about the deadly beavers, you understand, just that you haven't properly cited a source for this claim of yours...'

Congress IP ranges

[dtfinch]

FTA: 156.33.*.*
Maybe this'll come in handy someday. Can't imagine what I'd use it for though.

Re:Everybody's doing it!

[AndroidCat]

You know, that scares me [wikipedia.org] and I monitor, like, 40+ scientology pages.

Re:What is your point?

[Savantissimo]

Republican hatchetman Ken Mehlman's entry had a picture of a flaccid penis on it when I looked him up. Interestingly, the page was locked to edits. When I mentioned on the discussion page that it seemed to be a more figurative likeness than most Wikipedia readers were expecting, both the picture and my G-rated comment disappeared.

Re:Congress blocked :P

[monkeydo]

Google for "santorum" some time, and hit "I'm feeling lucky". Some people consider that a political statement, and some consider it a troll.

Someone thinks this [senate.gov] is a political statement? Shocking!

Re:Congress blocked :P

[killtherat]

I am obligated to point out that the character you are quoting to back up your argument is a lunatic.

That's just your opinion ;-)

Re:What is your point?

[iabervon]

There was some news story where the mainstream sources mostly had the wording of some critical quotation wrong in various ways (which is actually generally true of mainstream news quotations, since they come from reporters quickly writing something down when it's said, not recordings; they usually get the right meaning, but rarely the right words). Surprisingly, Wikinews almost alone had the quotation exactly right (i.e., perfectly matching the available audio recording of the event). But the weather map that day was a picture of some guy's butt, a mistake that none of the other media sources made.

Re:Congress blocked :P

[poot_rootbeer]

And now Congress will vote to make freely-editable online encyclopedias illegal.

"We'd love to fight this blatantly un-Constitutional law," a spokesman for the ACLU said, "but we're all too busy defending child molesters' right to ban school prayer in the womb."

There, now we've got two ludicrious misrepresentations out of the way. Is that enough that we can move on to relevant discourse instead?

Re:Oh, that'll stop 'em

[PhxBlue]

If they did, do you think they'd be working in Congress?

Re:Is it just me?

[gronofer]

Wikipedia seems to bring out the worst in some people. My favourite example is this [wikipedia.org]. Do these people have nothing better to do?

tax dollars

[screaser]

Wikipedia wars.

Your flippin tax dollars at work.

Re:Beaverl Attack: Wikipedia has NEVER been great.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Beavers explosively attack people with their menacing teeth. They are the most deadly animals alive."

That's the best kind of vandalism. The kind that doesn't actualy remove information or mislead. Take this entry on Paganini: He was widely considered a hardcore motherfucker, and probably the first musician to be a badass. [wikipedia.org] Who cares if that's not true, or in proper encyclopdeaic form? It's fucking hilarious for the handful of people that might ever read it.

Re:Beaverl Attack: Wikipedia has NEVER been great.

[jobsagoodun]

Does the uncyclopedia get vandalised by people correcting the jokes with facts?

Explanation

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps no citation because nobody who has been attacked by beavers has ever lived to tell the tale?

The Martians have the right idea...

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

Blow up congress.

Wikipedia should just ban all content reguarding active politicians because they cant behave themselves.

Simple. Children should be spanked.

Re:Congress blocked :P

[Shai-kun]

+1, Pink Floyd.

Props to Wikipedia

[smittyoneeach]

The IP ranges of US Congress have been currently blocked

Who hasn't wanted to bitch-slap the entire US Congress?
It simply doesn't get more righteous than that.

Re:Main IP offender no longer banned

[Anonymous Coward]

"Well, they DO sorta run the country and stuff."

Nope, they are public servants. The government is of, By, and for the people.

Re:Congress blocked :P

[Anonymous Coward]

POLITICIAN: Hi, I'm running for office and I would like you to vote for me! I plan to lower taxes and reduce government spending. I'm a proactive envirmonmentalist, and I propose a well grounded national health care program.

VOTER: You're lying!

POLITICIAN: Why woudl you say that?

VOTER: Your lips are moving...