Loop Larcenist still At Large

Print

The stealth deleter lives among us and now has a name:

Enric?

Yes, a wiki named Enric is whacking theloop.

 

He emerged from the primordial ooze this week, writing that theloop, which began a year ago this month, has not "accumulated respectability…I suggest that you wait a year or two until your website has more history behind it, and then you try to reinsert it after the last newspaper and with a very neutral text."

I modestly informed young Enric that theloop, while a baby in terms of longevity, has a far greater circulation (calculated in unique visitors per month) than any other on-line newspaper or news magazine in the community.  

He replied, (not edited for spelling, syntax or lack of reason) "… one advice, contract a profesional graphical designer (not a web designer) and tell him to design you a more serious corporate image."

Hey! Now you’ve gone too far. Challenge our journalistic chops all you want but we like our little loop logo!

So your editrix went wading through the virtual cyber mega-plex that is Wikipedia and found a honcho in Northern California to investigate. He writes, "oversight comes in the form of 1500 or so volunteer administrators, who have the ability to remove content, ban users, or block computers from accessing Wikipedia….none of us are able to identify who may have contacted you."

But he promises an answer soon.

So, gentle reader, go to Wikipedia and add theloop back in. Because it has certainly been deleted as you read this. 

 

6 thoughts on “Loop Larcenist still At Large

  1. You are 100% correct about the crap going on with that site and the removal of information. I have looked into it and am aghast at the levels of control that ‘experienced’ editors and their chronies have over what is supposed to be a free encyclopedia. In this instance, an editor by the name Orlady is on a crusade against our communities in particular. She antagonoizes others and instigates problems daily. She singlehandedly has gone after anyone who has added Larchmont, New Rochelle information to the database for over a year, trivializing the importance of such information and, even worse, lying about users identities to create ‘plausible’ reasons for removing information that she doesnt personally care for.
    I, along with at least 14 other people I am friendly with, have ALL tried to work on the site and we have ALL been blocked and banned under some outrageous rationale. I think that everyone interested go online as well to see firsthand what is occurring and to try and contribute as well, so that we might break the cycle!!!!!!!!!!!

  2. I don’t understand how authority is delegated on Wikipedia because their actions are completely devoid of common sense. I remember there being a page on Glen Island Park and it has been removed within the past week.

  3. After reading about the Larcenist on ‘theloop’ I explored Wikipedia to see what the site was all about. I noticed the same issues with information being deleted, and saw the same connection to one user in particular by the name ‘Orlady’ . It seems that this is her vendetta against our towns. Should we really blame her though, I mean she does live in Tennessee!
    : P

  4. Did you know that they have removed information and images from the article many times in the past. I first noticed it because several nice postcard images dating back over 80 years were no longer there when I went to view the page a few days later. More disturbingly, this is something that they have been doing to the New Rochelle article and articles found on Wikipedia that relate to New Rochelle. Just today I went on to see that they have removed the following: “Travers Island”, “Glen Island”, “Neptune Island”, “Residence Park”, “Premium Point” and one on the New Rochelle “U.S. Post Office”.
    This is all being driven by the user named ‘Orlady’ (not the enric person you thought it was). Orlady states that she is from Oak Ridge, Tennessee and makes many edits to add information about that city and state. Most of her edits are about trivial places and unkowns within her state. However, she insists on focusing alot of her attention on monitoring the communities of westchester, particularly New Rochelle, Bronxville and Larchmont, and she tracks the many users who make changes or additions to these articles. She is also the user who was behind reverting the addition of ‘theloop’ link as well as labeling those who did as ‘sockpuppets’ so she could have them blocked. Since Wikipedia is a free site open to users’ contributions, it is clear that she is driven to limit the information that is included about these communities. I personally believe that her animosity towards New Rochelle,Larchmont etc. is based on the fact they are interesting, historic locales whereas she resides in the more ‘vanilla’ realm of Tennessee which attracts far less interest.

    Anyway, I think it is a disgrace to see Wikipedia being controlled by various weird-users who only have ‘power’ because they spend their lives on the site and have a history of edits to back up their actions. Perhaps you can figure out some way to address this unfair situation?

    cheers!

    J DeLeseppes

  5. Just another case of the victim becoming the victimizer……From one of those who regularly question the authority and legitimacy of Wikipedia, here’s my advice to the editrix as well as my fellow loopaholics: let’s not take it personally.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *