Dirk “hasten-the-day” Beetstra goes on a Twitter deletion spree

A dirk.

Some people are busy writing Wikipedia.  Others are busy erasing it.

Dirk Beetstra is a Dutch guy who works in Saudi Arabia. He was last seen deleting articles created for the #1day1woman project.   Now he is systematically deleting official Twitter accounts from BLPs.

These days most everyone, including CEOs, law professors, and museums, do communicate with Twitter. Although some consider Instagram to be strictly for photos, more and more people are now switching to Instagram, and setting their old Twitter accounts to link straight to their Instagram account.  Even Google now pulls up someone’s Twitter account in the first page of a search.  Beetstra doesn’t seem to get that.

Here is a typical Beetstra deletion, removing the Twitter account from the article of Bill Madden, who is described as an American activist and musician, and judging by his Twitter feed, definitely not a Trump supporter:

Diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bill_Madden_(musician)&diff=prev&oldid=859421914

Edit summary: (External links: remove excessive social networking, indirect websites, and blogs, per WP:ELMINOFFICIAL/WP:NOT#REPOSITORY/WP:EL#EL11/WP:EL#EL13)

Does Beestra understand what he is doing?  In a word, no.

According to WP:ELMINOFFICIAL

“More than one official link should be provided only when the additional links provide the reader with significant unique content and are not prominently linked from other official websites.”

Does the “official website” link to the official Twitter account?  No.  It looks like the “official website” is strictly for displaying his music and album cover, which he keeps separate from his activism. His Twitter account, on the other hand, has 126K followers.  It does link to his ‘official website” however but not “prominently”, it is a shortened bit.ly link.

Does Beetstra understand WP:NOT#REPOSITORY:

“There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article”

This is clearly not “a collection of links, images, or media files” related to generic fandom about the guy, it is the guy’s official site, his primary one, and is most definitely a “useful and relevant” link.

What about WP:EL#EL11 and WP:EL#EL13?

These are both part of a list of “links to be avoided”, but at the top of the section it states “Except for a link to an official page of the article’s subject“, which this obviously is.

The overarching policy for this is WP:External links and the specific section is “Official Links” or WP:ELOFFICIAL

An official link is a link to a website or other Internet service that meets both of the following criteria:

  1. The linked content is controlled by the subject (organization or individual person) of the Wikipedia article.
  2. The linked content primarily covers the area for which the subject of the article is notable.

The link meets all of these requirements and does not fall under any of the restrictions, like paywalls etc.

So what on God’s Green Earth is Beetstra thinking of?

The edits are only 1 or 2 minutes apart, (see contribution history) so he is obviously not stopping to look at any of the websites, he is just mindlessly deleting links:

If this guy was not an admin, this would be considered vandalism.

Yo, Dirk, I’ve got one for ya.

This dude has an official website and TWO, count ’em, TWO Twitter accounts on his article. And the official Twitter account is prominently linked, oh so very prominently linked from his official website.  And that’s just in the infobox; have a look at that link farm under External Links

You know what to do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump

Advertisements

The new DUCK test: creating too many articles

The hasten-the-day people are going to be delighted with this one.

User:Vaintrain has been indeffed, basically for creating too many articles. No checkuser, just WP:DUCK.  And you guessed it, they were articles about women.

They managed to create 25 articles, of which 23 have now been mass deleted. The only two left are Canadian women who played volleyball, Marisa Field and Tricia Mayba.

If these were members of some obscure local Irish men’s team, you can bet there would be people working feverishly to save this information for posterity before the original links went dead, because penis. And don’t get me started on Pokemon characters. But they are women, so the articles were not even userfied, or put into draft space, they are just gone.

These women’s names and accomplishments will not be scraped by bots and go into the database that is WikiData, and be available for later research. They are just lost, mass deleted by Wikipedia’s very own admins.

But hey, no penis, so who cares, right?

This all leads back to a very interesting character indeed, Sander.v.Ginkel. This guy is apparently a Dutch scientist doing research in exercise physiology. He wrote literally thousands of stubs about athletes, but was banned by a community lynch mob led by Fram. Wikipedia is now claiming that he created User:Vaintrain as a sockpuppet. He is a real person, a PhD. He volunteered his time and expertise to work on Wikipedia, and this is how he is treated.

The discussion is here. Sander.v.Ginkel started the thread, claiming Fran told him “everything I said was all a load of crap”.  Oh dear, Fran’s edit summary even says “crap”.

Fram thought the guy had made some error in copying a birth date that had been recorded incorrectly somewhere else, there was some confusion about templates, and some birth dates had been left off of translated articles or maybe it was lists, because it looked like Fram was leaving off the death dates.  Sander.v.Ginkel said that should be a separate discussion and wanted Fram to use more collaborative language, but Fram was successful in turning the discussion into the Boomerang, and getting the guy permanently banned.

When Fram was caught in an error the response was:

Yep, that was stupid of me, thanks for checking it. Now corrected. Fram (talk) 14:56, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Unbelievable, according to the discussion, in a year’s time the guy created about 2000 women’s football players’ pages, 2500 stubs about weightlifters, and articles on all the weightlifters at previous world championships, all medalists at all world championships, medalists at other competitions, Olympic participants, maybe 14,000 articles in total.

The biggest problem seemed to be with the women footballers. Sander.v.Ginkel offered to go through the articles, but instead they just indeffed him. Whatever happened to these articles? According to the closing admin,

I think it reasonable that a list of Sander’s existing problematic BLP articles should be made for reference for interested parties to recreate properly. Once created, one (1) week’s notice should be given in a public enough manner so that editors and interested Wikiprojects (Cycling and Olympics were mentioned by name) can “adopt” articles to either correct during that week or userfy for longer-term correction. After said week, corrected articles should be removed from the list and the remaining uncorrected BLP articles should be deleted.

A week to go through 14,000 articles. Yeah, right. Totally “reasonable”.

You can’t even userfy that many articles in a week, much less “correct” them. And now anyone who does create those articles will be indeffed as a sock of Sander.v.Ginkel.

Fram, …now where have I heard that name before?  Wasn’t that the admin who got rid of Dr Blofeld, the guy who did all the destubification contests?

Hasten The Day, indeed.

And Wikipedia wonders why they can’t get more experts to contribute.

@WikiWomenInRed is DOWN

The Twitter account for Women in Red is down.
https://twitter.com/WikiWomenInRed

It’s been a rough summer for WiR.  First, their new user group gets renamed after it gets co-opted by dudes.  In this case , (Ashley Van Haeften) who really has done a lot to stop discrimination in the past, did some unselfconscious mansplaining to the group about the serious resistance to the group they would be facing from him unless it embraced his own LGBT agenda.

As people hemmed and hawed over signing up for the group, saying they really didn’t have time, and various other socially acceptable excuses, it was determined that the group should be renamed to better fit the actual purpose of the group. So “Women in Red User Group” has now become “Gender Diversity Visibility Community User Group”.

I’ve seen plenty of women do “intersectional editing” on LGBT topics on their own, volunteering some time to work on edits of underrepresented groups they are not a part of, or even going out of their way to go to a few editathons on a weekend.  We’ll see how it works when they are forced to do so by Fae’s bullying.

Then Dirk Beetstra deleted all those articles about women and refused to put them back.  The discussion eventually made its way to the WiR talk page, but it is not clear whether the edits have been reversed yet or not.

While you’re on that page, it is impossible not to notice that Tony Ballioni and Alex Shih have run afoul of the women’s group with their latest mischief.

And now the Women in Red Twitter account is gone.  How could that happen?  Where is their communications director?

It seems that a certain Victuallers (Roger Bamkin) was left in charge of the account and decided to change the birth date of the organization to 2015, making it under 13 years old, whereupon it was deleted as being underage.
   

Beth Macy

[Note: Beth Macy is a New York Times best selling author with a very interesting voice. Do google her or look at her website, intrepidpapergirl.com.

She ought to have a Wikipedia article, but she doesn’t, because it was deleted by Dirk Beetstra who works for SABIC in Saudi Arabia. Her voice has been silenced because Beetstra is convinced it was written by a sockpuppet of some guy he is having a feud with. See “Beetstra mass deletes #1day1woman“.

So here is her article, as it looked before it was deleted. She deserves better.]

Beth Macy

Beth Macy is an American journalist, and non-fiction writer.

Life

She was a reporter for The Roanoke Times,[1]

Works

References

  1. Petrouske, Rosalie Sanara, “Before Leaving”, And Here, Michigan State University Press, pp. 315–316, ISBN 9781609175412, retrieved 2018-08-09
  2. “The Worst Drug Crisis in American History”. The New York Times. 2018/07/31. Retrieved 2018-08-09. Check date values in: |date= (help)
  3. “Dopesick”: Author reveals impact of painkillers on the opioid epidemic”. CBS News. Retrieved 2018-08-09.
  4. ‘Dopesick’ is a page-turning look at the nation’s opioid crisis and big Pharma”. USA TODAY. Retrieved 2018-08-09.
  5. “‘Dopesick’ brings the opioid epidemic to heart-breaking life”. Christian Science Monitor. 2018-08-08. ISSN 0882-7729. Retrieved 2018-08-09.
  6. “Shooting up – The Boston Globe”. BostonGlobe.com. Retrieved 2018-08-09.

External links

Beetstra mass deletes #1day1woman

(H/T Wikipeidasucks.co¹)

Dirk Beestra has just gone on a mass deletion spree against articles created for the #1day1woman project.  Not even a “speedy delete”, just deleted without discussion.

Beetstra is a guy from the Netherlands with poor English skills who works for a big oil company in Saudi Arabia. His usual target is some guy called Slowking, who he had some complaint about over fair use of images, an argument he won with the block button.  Beetstra is obsessed with Slowking and was convinced that the user: Warren5th who created these articles was the same guy, per (surprise, surprise surprise) WP:DUCK, and started deleting the articles even before the SPI was completed.

beetstra mass deletion

These were valid articles.  Some were translations from other wikis, and some were ordinary redirects, a device that helps save the reader’s time. Some had already been worked on by other users who were experts in the field, and who commented bitterly on Beetstra’s talk page.


“Who cares about trophies collected by socks? G5 mass deletion is a serious measure that should only be undertaken to protect the integrity of the encyclopedia content. When (as apparently in this case) the content is unproblematic, it should be avoided, and the fact that this supposed sock has spent their sockery creating what looks like good and properly sourced content should call into question the reasons they were blocked and forced to sock.”

LOL

And there is a discussion on AN (archived) as well, where we find out there is a special “tool” called “nuke”,  (Special:Nuke) that only admins can read. For some reason I find this first-person-shooter type weapons imagery totally unsurprising for a bunch of entitled white dudes.

It also has transpired that Beetstra has been so intent on stalking Slowking, that he is restoring blatant vandalism just because Slowking reverted it.

But Beetstra is an anal kind of guy, a nasty little ‘rules-are-rules’ control freak.

There are NO good edits from banned editors…. .. the only solution is to quickly find the socks (I’ve updated the AbuseFilter with some new stuff).

In the meantime there are multiple complaints about his bot, User:COIBot which is adding extra colons everywhere.

The list of mass-deleted articles is below, but that’s just scratching the surface.  Look at for instance this edit by Dirk, reverting all of Warren5th’s edits to Beth Macy.  What this Warren person did was basically create a new article from a redirect, complete with OCLC numbers and ISBNs, and impeccable references from NYT, Christian Science Monitor, Boston Globe, etc.  Beetstra deleted all of them,  leaving the article as a redirect.  The Hasten-the-Day people are going to be delighted with this one – an actual admin who goes around erasing the encyclopedia as fast as decent editors can write it – and who has the complete confidence of Wikipedia’s governance.

And Wikipedia has given Beetstra unlimited power, in perpetuity.  He doesn’t have to be re-elected, he doesn’t have to undergo periodic training or review. He can even keep indeffing as many more good and prolific content writers as he wants.   And the only thing the other admins and former arbs can do is come to his talk page, hat in hand, and beg.

What an asshole.  This is why we can’t get good editors.