User:Linuxbeak/Angry letter

To whom it may concern:

My name is Alex Schenck. I go by the online user name of "Linuxbeak", and I'm a Wikipedia administrator as well as a heavily-involved IRC channel operator. I have been directed to your press release citing multiple users on Wikipedia as pedophiles as well as your call that Wikipedia be child-blocked. I am writing to you to protest your press release as shallow, unresearched, and inflammatory.

In your press release, you say the following:

"Once we visit Zanthalon's discussion page, we see one user asking Zanthalon to vote for a user named "Lucky69" to the admin team. This example of pedophile nepotism shows that a vulgar name of "Lucky69" does not deter pedophiles from putting sexual degenerates on the wikipedia staff. Lucky69 is now an admin at wikipedia thanks to the efforts of the pedophile underground at wikipedia"

This can not be any further from the truth. First off, the administrator's user name is not "Lucky69"; it is "Lucky 6.9", similar to the the phrase Lucky 7 (minus one-tenth). We do not encourage vulgar user names; in fact, we block offensive user names as per policy at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Username. Quoting directly from that page, we block accounts with:

"Names which refer to sexual acts or genitalia Names which are scatological or pornographic Names which contain profanity, obscenities, or other potentially offensive language"

Additionally, according to our blocking policy at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy, we WILL block offensive user names. "Lucky69" is offensive; "Lucky 6.9" is not.

Secondly, your statement that "Lucky69 [sic] is now an admin at wikipedia thanks to the efforts of the pedophile underground at wikipedia" is not only laughable, it is dead wrong. If anything, the true pedophiles that you cite in your press release worked against having Lucky 6.9 voted in as an administrator. Allow me to quote from Lucky 6.9's archived Request for Adminship, which you may find at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Lucky_6.9(4)...

"Oppose, Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Childlove movement: knee-jerk reactions should be avoided. 24 at 17:48, 8 August 2005 (UTC)"

24, or more specifically, 24ip, is one of those that you cite as a pedophile. So if 24ip is a pedophile, and if he's voting in opposition to Lucky 6.9 being voted in as an administrator, then are pedophiles the people responsible for voting Lucky in as an administrator? Do you see where the disconnect is?

Out of curiosity, I looked at the archived Vote for deletion that is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Childlove_movement/Deletion_debate_archive. Quoting directly from it:

"We have sunk to an all-time low by allowing this "article" to be posted, complete with its image of the cover of a child porn magazine. Let's get off the POV/NPOV bandwagon and just speedy delete this. No redirect, no nothing except for maybe reporting this pervert to the proper authorities. If this stays, I go for good and I hope that others will consider doing likewise as well. Sysops, take note. If I blank my pages over this, I demand to have my history removed as well. I've never been so nauseated in my life. - Lucky 6.9 02:43, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)"

See? Lucky 6.9 voted to DELETE that page because it was so disgusting! He even suggested reporting the author to the authorities!

To whoever I am talking to, please understand why I am so angry. I'm not against your cause; in fact, I'm totally for it. Pedophiles need to be kept in check and away from children. However, you have falsely insinuated that one of our administrators is pro-pedophile and in fact supported by this supposed pedophile underground. You couldn't be any further from the truth!

The entire thing with Lucky 6.9 is very upsetting, but that isn't even the half of it. You state on your press release the following:

"One wikipedia admin, by the name of Ta bu shi da yu, who is a self-described liberal marxist, goes on to commend Zanthalon's contributions."

He does NOT! Quoting directly from Zanthalon's user talk page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Zanthalon:

"I appreciate you clarifying sources for the article. Good job. Thank you. - Ta bu shi da yu 12:07, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)"

Ta bu shi da yu, one of our most active administrators with over 22,700 (which you may check for yourself at http://tools.wikimedia.de/~kate/cgi-bin/count_edits?user=Ta+bu+shi+da+yu&dbname=enwiki), was thanking Zanthalon for CLARIFYING SOURCES! He wasn't "commending" him for anything, he was telling him that adding sources to an article were appreciated (because sources mean that an article has integrity). And you know what Zanthalon, the pedophile, replied with? Quoting again from the user talk page of Zanthalon:

"Thanks for this. I appreciate your efforts on this article as well and your ability to approach this article objectively despite your distaste for its subject matter. --Zanthalon , 18:07, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)"

See that? Zanthalon replies in kind, thanking him to approach the article objectively despite [his] distaste for its subject matter. Come on! If that isn't telling you that Ta bu shi da yu isn't a pedo or a supporter, than what is?!

Third! You state in the press release:

"Another wikipedia admin, by the name of Schissel, thanks Zanthalon for uploading an image. Schissel also has a curious looking red star on his wikipedia profile."

First off, I both laughed and cursed at the same time when I read that. What, are you suggesting that the red star means Schissel is a communist? Did you even read the caption underneath it?

That curious red star is called a barnstar. It's a type of trophy that editors award to each other for a job well done. I myself have several! You may read more about your curious red stars at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Barnstars_on_Wikipedia. I am under the impression that you do not trust Schissel, and that silly comment about the barnstar is my proof. If you weren't trying to somehow defame Schissel, then why even MENTION the barnstar, which is a TROPHY?

Anyway, continuing with Schissel, I will quote the user talk page of Zanthalon... AGAIN.

"Hi! Thanks for uploading BLogo. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GFDL, or {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) Thanks! Schissel 23:53, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)"

First, it wasn't like that image was child pornography; instead, it was a LOGO. A LOGO in order to expand the Childlove article. Believe it or not, uploading a logo of the Childlove movement would expand the article and make it of higher quality.

Schissel used a prefabricated template which states "thanks". You may see some of those templates at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace. It wasn't like Schissel was going out of his way to thank Zanthalon for uploading an image; we admins have better things to do with our time. He was, if anything, warning Schissel that he noticed that this image had no copyright status tag, and as such needed to be given one, lest we delete it in compliance with U.S. Copyright laws.

I apologize that my tone is very inflammatory, but it has been a very rough week for Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation. I personally am tired, and having you, a respectable group, insinuating that our administrators are criminals and perverts makes me sick.

As such, I am demanding that you rerelease this press release without the defamatory and false comments about our administrators. I wish that an apology be made to Wikipedia's administrators, and one specifically given to Lucky 6.9, who has been unfairly and relentlessly harassed as a direct result of your misinformed press release.

Again, I applaud your efforts, and you do make the Internet safer. However, do not accuse our users, especially our well-established and credible users and administrators, of being pedophiles unless you have solid, concrete proof. The entire accusation with Lucky 6.9 (which you 1.) skewed the name 2.) falsely accused and 3.) caused unnecessary grief) does not help your cause at all.

I may be contacted through this email address, or through AIM at linuxbeak1. I expect a prompt reply to this e-mail.

Regards,

Alex Schenck Wikipedia Administrator and IRC channel operator -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Linuxbeak