Information icon.svg Nominations and Campaigning for the 2022 RationalWiki Moderator Election are now closed.

The election booth is now open!

User talk:Oenophyta

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
New logo large.png Welcome to RationalWiki, Oenophyta!

Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards!

Tell us how you found RationalWiki here!

If you are interested in contributing:

๐”–๐”ฒ๐”ช๐”ช๐”ž ๐”„๐”ฑ๐”ฅ๐”ข๐”ฌ๐”ฉ๐”ฌ๐”ค๐”ฆ๐” ๐”ž (๐”ฎ๐”ฒ๐”ข๐”ฏ๐”ข๐”ฉ๐”ฆ๐”ฐ) (๐”ฐ๐” ๐”ฏ๐”ฆ๐”ญ๐”ฑ๐”ฒ๐”ฏ๐”ž) 23:11, 11 April 2021 (UTC)


Because of your edits to and time on the wiki, Autopatrolled has been added to your user rights. This lets you bypass most of the abuse filters, bypass the CAPTCHA, and edit more frequently. If you have questions, bleat ask away.

We hope you enjoy your newfound POWER — and these external tools:

Oh, never mind. Guess Chris didn't like that...-Flandres (talk) 15:58, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
I removed the right initially because it was given to allow you to edit a page you could edit anyway, but you probably shouldโ€™ve been autopatrolled anyway.
Whilst Iโ€™m here: if youโ€™re nominating a page for deletion, add the {{delete}} template before you create the deletion discussion and itโ€™ll format it for you, just click the โ€œpreload debateโ€ link. Christopher (talk) 16:06, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
You can block my account now. Oenophyta (talk) 19:52, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Who is this Oenophyta?[edit]

This is either:

  • (1) A sockpuppet of Oliver Smith who has learnt the errors of his ways and is trying to get some inappropriate pages he created deleted to prevent internet feuds, having grown tired of them.
  • (2) His brother or someone else he knows coming here i.e. a meatpuppet.
  • (3) An impersonation of Smith to create confusion (if the latter it has certainly worked).

Regardless of who this person is - the issues they raised seem genuine yet their last edit was reverted. Shelter (talk) 00:07, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Who is this brand new account and why are they giving a shit about this old drama? PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 00:15, 23 April 2021 (UTC)


Remember the last step, adding {{RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/ARTICLE NAME}} to RW:Articles for deletion/Log. Christopher (talk) 13:22, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

I don't trust you[edit]

You sound awfully similar to the edits made by a banned user in Talk:Nathan Cofnas such as Tobias, Venom, Mountain. Your edits recently have been weirdly involved with Oliver Smith/Mike Smith drama including [1], afd for Anatoly Karlin. You aroused suspicion by other users here; your edit made me suspicious here, and the post here, and your edit in Nathan Confas sounds very similar to your recent edits concerning Mikemikev. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png ๐ŸŽ„LeftyGreenMario!๐ŸŽ„(Mod) 21:15, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

I think Iโ€™ve made it clear I donโ€™t trust them either, but for now theyโ€™re cleaning up old drama with AfDs rather than starting more. Christopher (talk) 21:19, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
Even so, "banned unless you create a sufficiently productive sockpuppet" seems like a dubious policy. I'm not familiar enough with the past drama to pass judgement, though. ๐’ฎ๐‘’๐“‡๐‘’๐“ƒ๐‘’ talk 21:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
(EC.) On Christopher's talk page, Oenophyta plainly stated: "I'm only here to remove some of Smith's articles he wrote based on people he was in feuds with." At the same time, Oenophyta seems a bit unfamiliar with how to do things on this wiki, while Smith obviously would have been experienced. So I'm guessing it's someone else acting on Smith's behalf. But the AfDs seem constructive enough. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 21:44, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
[EC]nnocent until proven guilty, itโ€™s hard to accuse them of being anyone specifically as theyโ€™ve defended Smith (not much) whilst AfDing his articles and made it pretty obvious they donโ€™t like Coombs. I personally do support โ€œbanned unless you create a sufficiently productive sockpuppetโ€, the end result is the site is better off.
I know we all want to make sure everyone knows we werenโ€™t fooled if this account is banned, but I donโ€™t see the good of endless speculation. Christopher (talk) 21:46, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
To clarify, I also wouldn't support banning this account at this point. But if clearer evidence emerged that this is Smith, I do think the account should be banned even if it is constructive. Constructive editing improves the site, but as I understand it Smith was banned for a more serious reason than low-quality editing, which I'm not convinced could be compensated for with high quality editing alone. ๐’ฎ๐‘’๐“‡๐‘’๐“ƒ๐‘’ talk 22:16, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
I certainly don't trust you. The fact that you created your user page by putting the banned template on it didn't help. Why would somebody derail an AfD discussion by sating that Smith was unjustly banned? Why would a new user come here with the single purpose of getting articles written by Smith deleted? Smith called for his own articles to be deleted before when the Neo-Nazi turds he wrote about started harassing him online. It looks to me like the same thing is happening again. And "banned unless you create a sufficiently productive sockpuppet" doesn't apply here. Just calling for articles you wrote under some of your many, many previous usernames doesn't count as being sufficiently productive. Spud (talk) 00:57, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Smith's articles[edit]

I am solely trying to clean up some of Smith's mess - he misused this wiki for years (2012-2021) to get back at people he feuded or had a spat with online - I've so far identified the following problematic or questionable articles he created (some have already been deleted):

The following questionable articles Smith likely didn't create himself but was still responsible for (getting someone else he knows to add them):

Additionally, in my opinion, all the following short/stub articles he made about people who attended the LCI should be merged to London Conference on Intelligence; it looks weird these individuals have separate pages when most their articles are block quotes from LCI paper abstracts they wrote.:

Finally, the following pages he created there is consensus to keep (primarily because although Smith made them different users have since rewritten them, but also because these individuals are infamous and widely criticised so there's a lot of sources on their articles):

Oenophyta (talk) 23:57, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

It's pretty clear, I think, that this is your project. What isn't clear is what generated your interest in this project, at this particular time, in the first place. Why are you so interested in cleaning this up? Why are you interested in it now, that is, what event led you to start this project at this time? It's not that cleaning it up is a bad thing in itself, it's just a strange project to have taken up at all. ๐’ฎ๐‘’๐“‡๐‘’๐“ƒ๐‘’ talk 00:55, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Some practical advice[edit]

Whatever the reason for your project, I thought I'd try to inject a bit of common sense, or something like that. So that constructive AfDs can go forward smoothly and pointless drama beyond that be limited.

In the current old AfD for Anatoly Karlin, you have Smith trying to get it deleted as "Agent47". Then Bongolian put it this way in response: "This isn't your first time trying to delete an article based on alleged harassment by the subjects or their colleagues. You seem to have a pattern of trying to put the genie back in the bottle". If you're not Smith but working on his behalf, then it's likewise the case for you that you can't put all his genies back in their bottles. Some AfDs will be easy to "win" and others hard, if "Delete" is a win.

So I suggest you go through your list of Smith articles and pick the trashiest ones for AfD first. With those, you can probably get more than one article deleted a day as long as they truly remain as bad as the recent ones. Eventually, though, you'll run into articles people here are less inclined to delete, and at some point you'll have to give up on getting the remaining ones deleted, whichever they are. The better you prioritize, the faster and smoother I think you can get it done and see when you've reached the point where it's best to stop pushing. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 01:22, 25 April 2021 (UTC)