Wacky Wikipedia Page

[bandaches]

The new changes are from IP address 165.123.59.8 which when looked up is from the University of Penn which is Greg's place of work.

IP Address: 165.123.59.8
Hostname: blk007.wlan.med.upenn.edu
IP Country: United States
IP Country Code: USA
IP Continent: North America
IP Region: Pennsylvania
Guessed City: Philadelphia
IP Latitude: 39.9597
IP Longitude: -75.1968
Organization: University of Pennsylvania
ISP Provider: University of Pennsylvania

We have been playing a game of chicken all morning switching them back and forth. I'm not even annoyed like last night as it's actually pretty funny now!

I am glad greg and his swarm of haters are showing their true colors again just to remind us all of why the hobby is split like it is today.  Other than staying on top of the Wiki changes, I think it best for us to go about our business, enjoying what should be a 2nd straight year of the hobby being better than ever and let the haters just continue to be the haters.  Even if the remote possibility that these are greg and ron imposters, it is a moot point as they are serving ron and greg's wishes and I don't expect either of them to complain and try to stop imposters serving their needs.

[Dr Popper]

I am glad greg and his swarm of haters are showing their true colors again just to remind us all of why the hobby is split like it is today.  Other than staying on top of the Wiki changes, I think it best for us to go about our business, enjoying what should be a 2nd straight year of the hobby being better than ever and let the haters just continue to be the haters.  Even if the remote possibility that these are greg and ron imposters, it is a moot point as they are serving ron and greg's wishes and I don't expect either of them to complain and try to stop imposters serving their needs.

I agree that it we should continue to focus on the hobby with all of the good stuff going on, but Dave should continue to try to keep accurate info on Wikipedia, which sounds like it won't be an easy task! 

What are the credentials for getting authorization to modify the text on Wikipedia?  Are there currently several collectors who can do this?

 

[Paul_Maul]

Even if the remote possibility that these are greg and ron imposters, it is a moot point as they are serving ron and greg's wishes and I don't expect either of them to complain and try to stop imposters serving their needs.

I missed something, what is it that connects the Ron impostor to Greg or Ron, and how exactly do the posts by the Ron impostor serve Greg or Ron's needs? To me they just attempt to make Ron look bad.

[Fanatical_and_Sickly]

What are the credentials for getting authorization to modify the text on Wikipedia?  Are there currently several collectors who can do this?

credentials?
it's essentially a completely open encyclopedia. anyone can edit most anything at anytime

there are guidelines and some rules, but it's mostly a free for all

[bandaches]

I agree that it we should continue to focus on the hobby with all of the good stuff going on, but Dave should continue to try to keep accurate info on Wikipedia, which sounds like it won't be an easy task! 

What are the credentials for getting authorization to modify the text on Wikipedia?  Are there currently several collectors who can do this?

 

Sadly anyone can modify Wikipedia.  There aren't enough enforcers to stop malicious editting.  greg will need to get this out of his system as part of his vendetta against Topps.  It is good therapy for greg as his attacking me for 13 years was getting old.  From what I understand, he still attacks me regularly in his graveyard forum but time for him to have a new focus for his time.

[bandaches]

I missed something, what is it that connects the Ron impostor to Greg or Ron, and how exactly do the posts by the Ron impostor serve Greg or Ron's needs? To me they just attempt to make Ron look bad.

Multiple events going on here.....

In theory, the "gregory grant" editor of wiki could be an imposter and someone who lives in the philly area could be editting Wiki in a manner that serves greg's needs.

As for connecting a ron imposter to ron, the person claimed to be ron.  Whether that is a fact is open for question but that is the "connection".  Ron's needs are to disrupt which is also a connection.  Ron has always wanted this forum to collapse.   If I were forced to guess, I would say that WWscout and Glocky are some friend of ron's and Ron Zombie id is actually ron but I don't care enough to find out as it is not important. 

The moral of the story is some psycho stopped by and we are ready to move on as we have done all year very well here. Someone has been modifying wiki for months in a manner that serves greg and all indications are that it is greg.

Does this clear things up for you?

[slamjim]

In theory, the "gregory grant" editor of wiki could be an imposter and someone who lives in the philly area could be editting Wiki in a manner that serves greg's needs.

Here is the IP of the latest change:

IP Address: 165.123.89.70
Hostname: ggrantmac.pcbi.upenn.edu
IP Country: United States
IP Country Code: USA
IP Continent: North America
IP Region: Pennsylvania
Guessed City: Philadelphia
IP Latitude: 39.9597
IP Longitude: -75.1968
Organization: University of Pennsylvania
ISP Provider: University of Pennsylvania

Too funny!

[BumChex]

It is pretty sad that Dave can't update the info to actually inform people about the hobby. There has to be some type of moderator you can contact about abuse. I've never really used Wikipedia because the info can be sometimes unreliable so I have no idea how the rules work.

[Crakola Crayons]

I know that in the schools they tell the kids that Wikpedia is not a reliable source when doing research - specifically because anybody can put information in there (and change what is there).  My teenaged son always gets on me when I pull up Wikipedia for stuff.  LOL. 

I do feel for Dave.  He is trying to put useful information there and "someone" has decided to make a game of it by changing things every half hour.  Sad.

[Dr Popper]

credentials?
it's essentially a completely open encyclopedia. anyone can edit most anything at anytime

there are guidelines and some rules, but it's mostly a free for all

Really?  wow, I'm surprised about that.  So you don't need to get approval from them to post information on any topic?  I would think if that were the case then the info on there would be a mess, but I find it to be pretty accurate and well organized information.  If it were a free-for-all why don't we see spammers and jokesters messing with the content?

[Dr Popper]

I know that in the schools they tell the kids that Wikpedia is not a reliable source when doing research - specifically because anybody can put information in there (and change what is there).  My teenaged son always gets on me when I pull up Wikipedia for stuff.  LOL. 

I do feel for Dave.  He is trying to put useful information there and "someone" has decided to make a game of it by changing things every half hour.  Sad.

The bottom-line is that the information should be accurate without any bias.  That's what it's supposed to be about anyway.

[Crakola Crayons]

The bottom-line is that the information should be accurate without any bias.  That's what it's supposed to be about anyway.

I agree.  However, someone clearly does not want Old School and postcards mentioned there nor do they want the link to this forum in there.

[bandaches]

I missed something, what is it that connects the Ron impostor to Greg or Ron, and how exactly do the posts by the Ron impostor serve Greg or Ron's needs? To me they just attempt to make Ron look bad.

You do spend a lot of time asking me questions which I answer.  Now here is one for you.  Do you approve of the edits being made to Wikipedia that Dave Gross has reported have taken place by "greg" or his imposter and that I have reported have taken place for months on end? 

[Paul_Maul]

First off, you seem very defensive. There was nothing in my question which was provocative in any way, I just didn't understand why the "phony Ron" posts were being linked in your mind with Greg's minions, since they seemed to do nothing but make fun of Ron.

As for the wikipedia thing, I honestly never looked at the page, so I don't know what was even on there. I genuinely don't understand how wikipedia is set up or what the rules are. If there really are no rules, then this kind of thing seems inevitable whenever two people disagree about what the content of a page should be.

Please don't take this as a "defense" of Greg, it's just a hypothetical: let's say Dave puts up a big paragraph about Old School on the wiki page, and Greg thinks he's just doing it to promote his project and that Old School doesn't deserve such a large spot in the history of wackys. Conversely, let's say Dave thinks Greg is a douche nozzle, and that sending anyone to his web page is bad for the hobby, and he decides to delete Greg's link. How does one assess either of these edits? What is someone allowed to do or not do? I need this information to inform my comments.

[HeadAndBoulders]

I would like to know which site the link for the "all welcome forum" sends you to.  If its the barbecue, that is totally false.  Several of us are banned from there, not that that breaks my heart.  I think some people could actually watch Greg do wrong in the flesh and they would still defend him regardless of what he did.

I cant believe that all of this is even coming up since it has been peaceful on here for a while now.

[Paul_Maul]

When I looked at it (I believe after one of the edits) I think the "free for all" forum pointed to the old Greg forum. Pretty pointless as that forum is dead.

[slamjim]

As for the wikipedia thing, I honestly never looked at the page, so I don't know what was even on there. I genuinely don't understand how wikipedia is set up or what the rules are. If there really are no rules, then this kind of thing seems inevitable whenever two people disagree about what the content of a page should be.

The rules are to post factual information and have a reference for the info. No personal opinions. I posted only the below paragraph on Old School. I modeled it exactly after the post for the Postcards so they would fit together nicely. It's all factual and I cited Roxanne Toser's article from the new Non-Sport update.

In February 2010, Topps released another series called "Wacky Packages Old School" created by David Gross.  The Old School series consists of 33 stickers based on 1970s products that Topps did not already parody in the original 1970s series 1-16 run along with a 9 piece puzzle checklist. The box, wrappers and stickers are designed to resemble the earlier WP stickers. Also included are many chase cards and a sketch in every box. The first series sketches were all done by Jay Lynch. Old School series 2 is due out January 2010 and the sketches will not only be by Lynch but also Bill Griffith, Bhob Stewart, David Gross, Fred Wheaton, Brent Engstrom, Jeff Zapata, Joe Simko, Neil Camera, Smokin Joe and Mark Parisi. Old School is sold exclusively through the Topps Online Store

Please don't take this as a "defense" of Greg, it's just a hypothetical: let's say Dave puts up a big paragraph about Old School on the wiki page, and Greg thinks he's just doing it to promote his project and that Old School doesn't deserve such a large spot in the history of wackys. Conversely, let's say Dave thinks Greg is a douche nozzle, and that sending anyone to his web page is bad for the hobby, and he decides to delete Greg's link. How does one assess either of these edits? What is someone allowed to do or not do? I need this information to inform my comments.

No need for hypotheticals as the facts are all here: This is nothing to do with "deserving a large spot in the history of Wackys". It's been posted simply as a current release with only descriptive comments about what is in it. I didn't post anything about selling out pre-sales in 6 hours or stuff like that. Again, it's the same as the other parts of the page. Also, so do you think Greg should decide what is "deserving a large spot in the history of Wackys" for the other thousand of us? One guy gets to do that? The series exists, another is coming out and people on their own can decide that question which is not what Wiki is about anyway. Greg's been adding lines that are not referenced (since they are from his deluded mind) and solely opinionated. Against the rules spelled out for the site and by which most people stand behind which is what makes the site work. It's also not just all my project. 11 people worked on it in some capacity and their credits and links are being deleted as well (I linked Jay, Bill, Bhob and Joe Sikmo to their respective individual Wiki pages the first time around. Everyone else doesn't have their own page).

Secondly, both your examples are being done by Greg already. None are by me. Greg has been deleting the new forum, Ernie web page and the Topps Online Store and replacing the links with his own sites (forum and web page). I've only been switching them back. He was free to add his own site to go along with these but he chooses to only overwrite them. Since this has been going on most of the day I decided to add both his site links and all the ones he has been deleting back so they are ALL posted. Well, he has still gone in and removed the other three so there is no hypothetical: he's already been doing it.

[HeadAndBoulders]

When I looked at it (I believe after one of the edits) I think the "free for all" forum pointed to the old Greg forum. Pretty pointless as that forum is dead.

You got that right.  I will go there ocasionally to the uploads section.  There are never any posts anymore.

[slamjim]

When I looked at it (I believe after one of the edits) I think the "free for all" forum pointed to the old Greg forum. Pretty pointless as that forum is dead.

That was one time. All the other times (including now) it's points to his new forum.

[HeadAndBoulders]

I did a search to go to the Wikipedia Wacky Packages page.  Is that what you are talking about, Dave? I didnt see a link to this site.  Just a meager mention of Old School.

[slamjim]

I did a search to go to the Wikipedia Wacky Packages page.  Is that what you are talking about, Dave? I didnt see a link to this site.  Just a meager mention of Old School.

Yes, the meager mention is what Greg graciously allows. The link is there now as I fixed all the links (for now anyway).

[bandaches]

First off, you seem very defensive. There was nothing in my question which was provocative in any way, I just didn't understand why the "phony Ron" posts were being linked in your mind with Greg's minions, since they seemed to do nothing but make fun of Ron.

As for the wikipedia thing, I honestly never looked at the page, so I don't know what was even on there. I genuinely don't understand how wikipedia is set up or what the rules are. If there really are no rules, then this kind of thing seems inevitable whenever two people disagree about what the content of a page should be.

Please don't take this as a "defense" of Greg, it's just a hypothetical: let's say Dave puts up a big paragraph about Old School on the wiki page, and Greg thinks he's just doing it to promote his project and that Old School doesn't deserve such a large spot in the history of wackys. Conversely, let's say Dave thinks Greg is a douche nozzle, and that sending anyone to his web page is bad for the hobby, and he decides to delete Greg's link. How does one assess either of these edits? What is someone allowed to do or not do? I need this information to inform my comments.

This time the defensiveness is all in your mind, what aspect of my response to you and my question to you is defensive, I am curious....

No need for hypotheticals, stick to the facts and events that already took place.  "greg" has been deleting links to my website for months.  I have added mine back and left his there for months.  Finally I got tired of being the better man so I lowered myself to his level and started deleting his website link and adding mine.  It appears recently "greg" has resorted to editting the Old School writeup which includes mention of Topps actions to cut greg out as offensive to most of the hobby hence people should be turned off to Old School.

How do you feel about the above?

[Playbug]

There is a real good book you might want to take a look at called "Secrets from an Inventor's Notebook" by Maurice Kanbar. I have it and there's lots of good info in there. He's the guy who created Skyy Vodka, D-Fuzz-It comb, multi-plex cimenas, and tons of other things.

One important step he talks about is to protect your game by documenting it, and then get those documents notarized. That way you have proof of when and what you invented. Another important thing is doing patent searches (online and then later using a patent attorney).

Good luck and I hope to see your Wacky game on store shelves someday

Thanks a lot John. I will definately look into that book. I am tweaking out the actual gameplay (by playing it over and over) and seeing if there is anymore improvements that I can make before writing up the "How to Play" directions. I started them in a doc. folder, but haven't yet cemented in everything. You can play the game now, but I just want to make sure it is totally cool and I am not missing out on any possible things that would make it more fun and funner.  

[Playbug]

Jeff, I bet this is more of a case of him just not wanting to bother with your project and the logistics that go with it. I would be surprised if he was ignoring you because they were currently working on a Wacky board game.  It's still no excuse for him not responding to you though.  Some people think just because they are busy people don't deserve a response. 

Did you give them specific info about your game or just the general concept?

Hey Rob, No I didn't give anyone specifics. But I don't recall if you had seen the guitar I made and brought to the show. He saw that first, then I told him about the game and actually showed him my proto-type of the gameboard (which I also brought to the show). He started to ask questions but I didn't get into it too far with him for obvious reasons.

[Crust]

Guys I just went on the wiki page, and it said series 7 came out in December of 2010! That was last month. Someone is messing with it, because that is defently wrong. Was it Greg maybye??

[RawGoo]

65.54.51.92  is from Kansas.  Isn't Led Zepplin from greg's graveyard forum from that area?

I thought that IP might have been a Microsoft Hotmail server, but perhaps not. 

[Dr Popper]

Guys I just went on the wiki page, and it said series 7 came out in December of 2010! That was last month. Someone is messing with it, because that is defently wrong. Was it Greg maybye??

It should be September 2010.  That's probably just an error though.

[Paul_Maul]

Here's a Wikipedia policy that seems pertinent:

"Wikipedia is not a place to hold grudges, import personal conflicts, carry on ideological battles, or nurture prejudice, hatred, or fear. Making personal battles out of Wikipedia discussions goes directly against our policies and goals. In addition to avoiding battles in discussions, do not make changes to content or policies just to prove a point to someone with whom you disagree."

If "Gregorygrant" is in violation of wikipedia's policies, then Wikipedia should take whatever action their policies dictate. Beyond that, I honestly have no opinion because after glancing over Wikipedia's policies, I fully understand the spirit of what they want Wikipedia to be, but I have no clue what the letter of their law is as far as content or editing. So I'll leave it up to them to worry about it.

 

 

[slamjim]

Here's a Wikipedia policy that seems pertinent:

"Wikipedia is not a place to hold grudges, import personal conflicts, carry on ideological battles, or nurture prejudice, hatred, or fear. Making personal battles out of Wikipedia discussions goes directly against our policies and goals. In addition to avoiding battles in discussions, do not make changes to content or policies just to prove a point to someone with whom you disagree."

If "Gregorygrant" is in violation of wikipedia's policies, then Wikipedia should take whatever action their policies dictate. Beyond that, I honestly have no opinion because after glancing over Wikipedia's policies, I fully understand the spirit of what they want Wikipedia to be, but I have no clue what the letter of their law is as far as content or editing. So I'll leave it up to them to worry about it.

 

So...in translation your saying you think Greg is wrong (without mentioning He Who Can Not Be Named by you) for using Wikipedia for his personal grudges and you think Wikipedia should do something about it based on whatever stated policies they have.

Here is a very tiny example of what Wikipedia wants:
NO:
Superman is the coolest comic character ever. Way cooler than Batman. I bet if he fought the Hulk he would really kick his butt. He can fly, has super strength, X-ray vision and cold breath but I think his cold breath is a waste of time.
YES:
Superman was created in 1939 by Joe Siegal and Jerry Shuster for DC Comics. He has a secret identity of Clark Kent and works at the Daily Planet newspaper. He has an on again off again romance with fellow Planet reporter Lois Lane.

Etc, etc, etc. All these in the YES example are facts that can be verified by the comics existing and can be cited with references. With editing, they want additions to these facts to continue to build a database of everything that can be verified about the character without using opinion. They also have people who just got through pages doing corrections for grammar and checking on sources.

[Paul_Maul]

There are much more subtle examples that call into question what would be allowed though. There are plenty of things I could write about wackys that are factual and yet would not be in line with the spirit of what wikipedia wants. They try their best to codify all of this (listing page after page of policies) but it's not easy to codify "what we want."

What is expected in terms of brevity? I personally think what you wrote is totally reasonable, but you could go into much more detail about the series to the point where the Old School portion of the page might dominate the rest of the content. I think that would be bad, since Old School is a small portion of the wacky mythos, but is there a specific policy?

To me, it seems like Wikipedia's attitude is like the barbecue forum's: please be cool, but it's very tough for us to codify what that means.

[slamjim]

There are much more subtle examples that call into question what would be allowed though. There are plenty of things I could write about wackys that are factual and yet would not be in line with the spirit of what wikipedia wants. They try their best to codify all of this (listing page after page of policies) but it's not easy to codify "what we want."

What is expected in terms of brevity? I personally think what you wrote is totally reasonable, but you could go into much more detail about the series to the point where the Old School portion of the page might dominate the rest of the content. I think that would be bad, since Old School is a small portion of the wacky mythos, but is there a specific policy?

To me, it seems like Wikipedia's attitude is like the barbecue forum's: please be cool, but it's very tough for us to codify what that means.

I put in the same amount as the Postcards. If you want you can update the OS section and someone else can update the ANS with much more great info. It's simply a matter of someone doing it. That's the great thing about it.

For example, you could easily put in all your pack info for everyone to see.

[slamjim]

To me, it seems like Wikipedia's attitude is like the barbecue forum's: please be cool, but it's very tough for us to codify what that means.

Well, I think being cool is not erasing out other people's edit that contain factual info that completely follows the rules and spirit of the site and also not hijacking or erasing other users links. And also not adding personal grudge comments to referenced writings. All of which Greg has does. Do you agree?

[Paul_Maul]

I guess I'm not sure what they really want though. For example, if I go in and add all of the information from the Gallery, is that overkill. They say they don't want "statistics". Maybe they would think detailed information is good. I honestly don't know. I think it's clear though that if I added enough obscure information, at some point it would render everything else a needle in a haystack. That's why real encyclopedias have editors, to make such decisions.

[slamjim]

I guess I'm not sure what they really want though. For example, if I go in and add all of the information from the Gallery, is that overkill. They say they don't want "statistics". Maybe they would think detailed information is good. I honestly don't know. I think it's clear though that if I added enough obscure information, at some point it would render everything else a needle in a haystack. That's why real encyclopedias have editors, to make such decisions.

The Wacky page is very small compared to many others. It could easily have tons added. It doesn't need a price guide but stating info about each series would be great. 99% of the people reading the page don't have the Gallery and they are coming for info.

[Paul_Maul]

Well, I think being cool is not erasing out other people's edit that contain factual info that completely follows the rules and spirit of the site and also not hijacking or erasing other users links. And also not adding personal grudge comments to referenced writings. All of which Greg has does. Do you agree?

I definitely think pointing a link to somewhere other than what was intended is deceptive and uncool.