9 September 2004
- 21:5721:57, 9 September 2004 diff hist +666 Talk:Wikipedia (142 trolls) No edit summary current
- 21:5421:54, 9 September 2004 diff hist +783 N Wikipedia (by Richard Chilton) No edit summary current
- 21:5421:54, 9 September 2004 diff hist −739 Wikipedia (Richard Chilton) #REDIRECT Wikipedia (by Richard Chilton); this is an author who claims his own attribution, not a faction, so "by" applies current
- 21:5221:52, 9 September 2004 diff hist +3 Talk:Research:claim corruption ok it'll only be worse to do later, applying attribution standard ... (by Richard Chilton) current
- 21:5021:50, 9 September 2004 diff hist +553 N Talk:Research:claim corruption No edit summary
- 21:4721:47, 9 September 2004 diff hist +150 N Research:claim corruption suggest standard: "claim corruption" is a verb phrase describing what a user might want to do in one click as a command verb, but claims of corruption is a noun phrase for the result current
- 21:4321:43, 9 September 2004 diff hist +61 Talk:Wikipedia (142 trolls) eg
- 21:4121:41, 9 September 2004 diff hist +216 N Talk:Wikipedia (142 trolls) naming convention suggested: Wikipedia (by 142 trolls)
- 21:3821:38, 9 September 2004 diff hist +501 Talk:Wikipedia No edit summary
- 21:3521:35, 9 September 2004 diff hist +13,854 N Wikipedia (142 trolls) moved current
- 21:3521:35, 9 September 2004 diff hist −13,818 Wikipedia (from 142 perspective) "from" and "perspective" are redundant - moving to Wikipedia (142 trolls) to name article after commenting faction current
- 21:3221:32, 9 September 2004 diff hist +130 Wikipedia No edit summary
- 21:2821:28, 9 September 2004 diff hist +1,050 N Central control No edit summary current
- 21:2421:24, 9 September 2004 diff hist +607 N Authoritarianism No edit summary
- 21:2121:21, 9 September 2004 diff hist +558 N User-owned, user-run, user-controlled No edit summary current
- 21:1921:19, 9 September 2004 diff hist 0 Wikipedia (Richard Chilton) No edit summary
- 21:1821:18, 9 September 2004 diff hist +783 N Wikipedia (Richard Chilton) No edit summary
- 21:1021:10, 9 September 2004 diff hist +190 English Wikipedia User Richardchilton this excerpt could be titled Wikipedia (Richard Chilton) and is another perspective that should be integrated into Wikipedia (Reds) - the more Reds that explain the truth the better
- 20:3320:33, 9 September 2004 diff hist +64 Talk:Independent board avoid virtual community fanatics lusting to apply the police metaphor
- 20:3220:32, 9 September 2004 diff hist +1,886 Talk:Independent board candidates?
- 19:3819:38, 9 September 2004 diff hist −74 Wikinfo removing irrelevant nonsense - the Metaweb article on Wikinfo is entirely non-controversial and who wrote it is irrelevant - if anyone wants to know, they can look at its Page History there easily
- 19:3319:33, 9 September 2004 diff hist +535 User:Jukeboksi/Blog/September2004 are you actually tough enough to DO this job, Juxo? do you really think Monsanto or McDonald's or Exxon is going to be EASIER to deal with than Bomis/Wikimedia? tough it out and prove that you CAN
- 19:3019:30, 9 September 2004 diff hist +6 Research:claims of corruption #REDIRECT Guidelines for claiming corruption cases in Research Wiki woops odd name, too long to actually remember, thus probably a bad name current
- 19:3019:30, 9 September 2004 diff hist +65 N Research:claims of corruption #REDIRECT guidelines for claiming corruption in Research Wiki - rather than develop a whole "in" ...building metaphor, let's have a Research: space until en.consumerium.org exists
- 19:2919:29, 9 September 2004 diff hist −23 Guidelines for claims of corruption #REDIRECT Research:claims of corruption
- 19:2819:28, 9 September 2004 diff hist +66 N Guidelines for claims of corruption #REDIRECT guidelines for claims of corruption in Research Wiki; in general, such claims will be limited in Develop Wiki to those directly affecting operations or reliability of GFDL data
- 19:2719:27, 9 September 2004 diff hist +8 Talk:Guidelines for claiming corruption cases in Research Wiki fix link current
- 19:2519:25, 9 September 2004 diff hist +154 Test case No edit summary current
- 19:2419:24, 9 September 2004 diff hist +1,753 N Test case No edit summary
- 19:1719:17, 9 September 2004 diff hist +40 N Resarch Wiki pilot #REDIRECT Consumerium Research pilot current
- 19:1619:16, 9 September 2004 diff hist +1,424 N Talk:Guidelines for claiming corruption cases in Research Wiki usefulness
- 19:0919:09, 9 September 2004 diff hist +18 Wikimedia corruption #REDIRECT alleged Wikimedia corruption; that page is now balanced with clear marking of fact vs. allegation, transparent lying coverup "Response" from Wikimedia, and devastating "Counter", so current
- 19:0719:07, 9 September 2004 diff hist +543 Chief Editor No edit summary
- 19:0119:01, 9 September 2004 diff hist +456 Independent board No edit summary
- 18:5918:59, 9 September 2004 diff hist +2,042 Independent board definition from private sector, for use in resolving corruption claims and so on
- 18:5218:52, 9 September 2004 diff hist +3,670 Claims of corruption repairing vandalism damage: the source of the claims doesn't matter if they are easily documented, as they are (how to do so is now listed here), making "allegation" vs. "fact" more clear
- 18:3118:31, 9 September 2004 diff hist +4 Talk:Wikipedia (Reds) no delinking of Wikimedia corruption : it is the whole basis of the Reds' critique, you can't gut it like this in a talk page from Reds' perspective
- 18:2918:29, 9 September 2004 diff hist +18 N Consumerium:Reds #REDIRECT Reds; temporary redirect; when Consumerium:Reds are recognized formally as a faction of Consumerium:We, this can become a real article current
- 18:2918:29, 9 September 2004 diff hist +105 Wikipedia (from 142 perspective) No edit summary
- 18:2818:28, 9 September 2004 diff hist +20 Talk:Wiki corruption revert vandalism; the point of a libel suit is to end Wikimedia corruption and its influence on the GFDL corpus; there is no point talking about corruption without that possibility current
- 18:2618:26, 9 September 2004 diff hist +4 Talk:Wikipedia (Reds) revert censorship; certainly from the POV of Wikipedia (Reds) there absolutely IS Wikimedia corruption, you are imposing YOUR POV on this legitimate faction - do so in Wikipedia (Blues) or whatev
- 18:2418:24, 9 September 2004 diff hist +152 Deleted No edit summary
- 18:2318:23, 9 September 2004 diff hist +194 N Fred Bauder No edit summary current
- 18:2218:22, 9 September 2004 diff hist +122 Wikinfo Bauder as Lowest Troll of Research Wiki? Worth considering
- 18:2018:20, 9 September 2004 diff hist +652 N Perjury No edit summary current
- 18:1618:16, 9 September 2004 diff hist +2,387 N Chief Editor a key post
- 18:0918:09, 9 September 2004 diff hist +2,552 N Consumerium Governance Organization election No edit summary current
- 17:5917:59, 9 September 2004 diff hist +785 User talk:Juxo time for real editorial policy
- 17:5517:55, 9 September 2004 diff hist +400 Talk:Wikipedia (Reds) is structural corruption now past the point of "fixing", or, can Wikipedia by fixed by kicking out Wales, Mayer, Starling, Moeller and Beesley?
- 17:5217:52, 9 September 2004 diff hist +46 N Unsubstantiated claims #REDIRECT false and unsubstantiated claims current