Talk:Jimmy Wales asks Wikipedian to resign "his positions of trust" over nonexistent degrees

What happened?

So what happened? Essjay used a false identity? --Thunderhead - (talk) 18:14, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

All along, all his credentials and idenity were bogus. [1] Makpocker 18:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm going to try and find time to summarize the stuff. If anyone else want to do 50-words or whatever in the next hour or two, please do so. -- Zanimum 18:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I think there needs to be more on what happened here...this looks too much like a press release than anything. We need to report more on the story and what happened than just adding a statement from Jimbo. DragonFire1024 19:09, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes. If - as suggested above - EssJay is a fabricated online persona then that needs made clear. At the moment there's nothing to indicate what the wrongdoing might have been. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 19:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I wish everyone would read my comments before posting. I intend to write a bit more of an article on the background in this situation, but haven't had time to properly research it. I'd appreciate assistance or patience, not pointless noting of the obvious. -- Zanimum 21:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

• I did read your comment, and followed some of the links in your Google search. Sorry you felt I was hassling/criticising, that wasn't the intent. I'm not a regular wikipedia contributor so I don't know enough about this to feel I can usefully contribute.

What I seriously hope is that none of our contributors have misrepresented themselves, I don't think I've presented myself as anything more than a part-time hacker from Belgium, but I don't know about anyone else. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 21:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thunderhead is just a teenaged kid who likes the news. A persuasive teenaged kid who likes the news. Hopefully I'm nothing different. --Thunderhead - (talk) 21:16, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, BrianMC. I confuss that I misrepresent myself. Even my signature is bogus, Sorry. |||terinjokes | Talk 10:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• As you saw Zanimum, I did an edit to give a synopsis, glad you kept most of it. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 22:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Intro sentence

Hi! I'm not a regular here, so I won't change the article, but the intro sentence is a little confusing. As phrased, it suggests that the contributor (that is, Essjay) issued the retraction, not the New Yorker. Thanks, 69.17.34.114 23:02, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

and what is this "strong warning about lying about credentials"[italics mine], is is someone's characterization or Jimbo's words?  — Doldrums(talk) 23:19, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I wondered about that as well. I've been following it at Wikipedia, and this is the only statement Jimbo has made since saying that he considered it settled. He is (or was) in India, and has said that he will deal with this further when he has a stable internet connection. ElinorD 23:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Point taken.... Dave souza 00:44, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Improving this article

One way to improve this article is with an infobox containing a timeline of events, giving the dates and times of the New Yorker piece and of the various subsequent statements and occurrences. Uncle G 11:15, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

• Another improvement should be appropriate copy-editing so that the contents box is at the top of the page rather than down below. IronFist 03:40, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I've added the timeline. All of the sources were published prior to the article's dateline, and no developments subsequent to the dateline are included. Uncle G 14:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Further avenues for original journalism

Essjay also made statements about Stacy Schiff. I suggest that editors consider contacting Schiff for a response on the record to those statements. Uncle G 11:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think this article needs improved. I remember months ago walking into an office and picking up a copy of the The New Yorker issue sourced in this article. I wasn't able to finish reading "KNOW IT ALL" piece before I was seen, and wanted to take the magizine with me while leaving the building so I could finish reading it later. Now that I did finish reading the article... well... how credible?

"Essjay says that he routinely receives death threats... Yeah... 'There are people who take Wikipedia way too seriously,' he told me," according to Stacy Schiff.

Now the editorial staff at the magazine is pissed off because they took an un-person too seriously. How do you spell "too shay"? -Edbrown05 12:11, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

• touché, and that accent is ASCII 130, so hold down alt and type 130 on the numeric keyboard to get it. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 11:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

4th March Edit

Not sure whether the update/edit for march 4th should be made into a new article. Anyone elses views??--Markie 16:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

IMAGE

Can someone upload this image and place it at the top of the news story:

• Image of Essjay

Thanks 65.94.112.104 01:19, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• Done.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 14:44, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The relevance of the second image that you have added to the piece seems somewhat tenuous. Uncle G 15:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I added it because it pictured him as a scholar.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Hm honestly I wonder about that image. I did meet Essjay 2 times in person (last time in December 2006) and this person looked very much different. Just one random picture out of many pictures in Wikimedia universe displaying SJ (he is in the right front in orange): w:en:Image:NYC_meetup_12.jpg. If the image in the article is really Essjay it must be quite old. w:de:Benutzer:Arnomane 23:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Look at the Things I am not entry of w:en:user:SJ

Aha, so SJ is not Essjay...--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Pardon me for being yakity yakity on a news topic where my interest is virtually expired, but the current image reminds me of Cowicide. I cannot substantiate that notion because Cowicide appears to have erased Internet traces to his image history. -Edbrown05 01:41, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Having had a look at the discussion at w:Talk:Essjay controversy#Can we ditch the photo?, the possibility that it's not a self portrait and the privacy problem if it's real led me to comment out the image. Perhaps best to delete it altogether, but feel free to comment here. .. Dave souza 22:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I concur. We don't know that's him. --+Deprifry+ 22:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Since it's twice been added back, I've reworked the caption to make it clear we only have Essjay's word for it being a self-portrait. Strongly recommend removal, but I'm not going to edit war over this. .. Dave souza 22:44, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and since the image is the work of Essjay, it is relevant. -Edbrown05 22:46, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

But on the issue of privacy, the privacy problem rests with Essjay. Wikinews reports. -Edbrown05 23:00, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Um, that doesn't mean we need to engage in what is very likely a privacy violation simply because we can. The picture adds almost nothing to the article. JoshuaZ 23:06, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Since the contributors on Pedia deemed it wise to leave the image out, maybe we should too... It adds little to the story itself. To that end, I found the image of the scholar more informative, because it pictures him as a persona, but with the notion that it is ment to be a joke. Dave's capture suggested that the image is probably not him, or at least created some impression that he could not be trusted, which is NPOV an sich. If it were up to me I'd replace the image with that of the scholar. But there is clearly no privacy problem, people just shouldn't GFDL images of themselves...--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 23:09, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Here is news, either you want to report or you do not. I cannot understand how this article dealing with the misrepresentation of one's self could fail to provide information on how that misrepresentation was presented. -Edbrown05 23:20, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Vandal

Would somebody please stop the editor User:Doldrums from vandalizing the following article:

Jimmy Wales asks Wikipedian to resign "his positions of trust" over nonexistent degrees

The editor keeps deleting a lot of the information. It is possible he is a friend of Essjay. 65.94.112.104 11:23, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• Doldrums isn't a vandal, he's an administrator. I've also reverted your changes as they are against our policies. Published stories shouldn't get significant updates and the date should not be changed. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 11:42, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Link correction

{{editprotected}}

The New Yorker article needs its URL corrected to http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2006/07/31/know-it-all --Alden Bates (talk) 02:09, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Done --Pi zero (talk) 02:59, 19 November 2014 (UTC)