User:Cyphoidbomb/Campaign of Ignorance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut

Since circa June 2016, I've been dealing with a pervasive disruptive mindset among casual Indian film and TV editors that I've dubbed the "Campaign of Ignorance" because it seems to promote the removal of information, promotes the dumbing-down of articles, and seems to go out of its way to add confusion, ambiguity, sloppy formatting, and otherwise bizarre editing choices across Indian film and TV articles. It was almost as if a bunch of editors were looking at a really flawed template and forcing articles to adhere to it. Any attempts to fix the problems were usually reverted. Attempts to educate directly via discussion on user talk pages or on article talk pages are totally fruitless, as IP editors don't bother to look at the talk page and move to the next IP before you can properly invite them, and generally these casual editors just don't care about community guideline stuff. They're here to make their changes and move on.

Embedded notes don't seem to help much in controlling the problem, as many users employ the Visual editor, which suppresses embedded notes I think, and even the Page notice functionality we have available only seems to be displayed to desktop users, not mobile editors.

Examples[edit]

  • Leading zeroes - There were several users who kept adding leading zeroes to numbers: 01, 02, 03... No amount of "Please see MOS:NUM" was resonating. It finally quieted down after a few people were blocked. (Editor Arnav19 was responsible for spawning some of this)
  • Blatant misuse of parameters - Multiple users were misusing the |followed_by= and |preceded_by= parameters in TV infoboxes, incorrectly thinking that the latter is used to indicate what series replaced the 8:00 show after cancellation or what followed in the 8:30 time slot.[1] No amount of embedded notes or talk page discussions/notices/warnings seemed to help, but blocks and semi-protection got the job done. (Another issue that intersected with Arnav19)
  • Ambiguous slashes - Many editors like this guy seems to think that four names divided by ambiguous slashes is the best way to communicate.[2] Did this cast member play one character? Four characters, Were there twins? Was someone reincarnated? Are these married names? Try to fix it and it will return. This has been increasing since 2016 when I first added it here, and I'm ashamed I haven't logged more examples. Check out this 2020 version of an Indian TV article. You'll see among other affronts to logic:
    • Giaa Manek/Rubina Dilaik as Jeannie/Jenu/Chutki/Gita/Mitram/ Rajjo Ji/Jwala/Roopa/Mrs.Khanna (2012−2013)/(2013−2014)
      • So, did Gia Manek change her name to Rubina Dilaik? Are these two actors who worked at the same time? Did they work intermittently depending on who was available? Did one replace the other? Are all those names after the "as" unique characters? The same character but with different nicknames? Are they nonuplets? What's with the parentheticals separated by slashes? Are they trying to say that Manek had this/these roles from 2012-2013, but then Dilaik took over from 2013-2014? Or does it mean that both actors worked until some point in 2013, then were pulled from the show and then came back later in 2013? Now maybe we can apply some common sense here, but how much time is a reader expected to spend to do mental gymnastics?
      • Here we see Blackstonefire decide that the clarity of "Mammootty in a dual role as Professor Edward Livingstone and Officer Anto Antony of the Indian Police Service (IPS)" is too complicated for their taste, so they dumb it down to "Mammooty as Professor Edward Livingstone/Officer Anto Antony IPS" which now raises questions about which character or characters Mammootty is playing and what the other ambiguous terms mean. Maybe Blackstonefire isn't aware that this is a global encyclopedia, and not just the Mammootty or Malayalam encyclopedia, so we should be communicating to a global readership?
  • Deletion of real-world content - Someone will add real-world information about a cast member's departure to a TV cast list (as is urged by WP:TVCAST) "Jane Doe left the series in 2015 after a dispute with producers over content.[12]" Another user will then come and remove the real-world content.[3] Another example here of real-world content about Shivani Tomar's departure being removed in favor of a basic list. This has been done numerous times. One of the IPs involved in the Shivani Tomar disruption here wound up being blocked as part of a CheckUser block, so we know some of the problems are created by our least favourite editors.
    • Similar to this, some editors seem to think that a TV show's character list is supposed to only obsess about who is related to whom, instead of describing who the characters are, what they do, and how they interact with other characters. In these edits[4][5] one user deletes such information without explanation, oblivious to our goals.
  • Interpretive labels/gender labels - Some editors think it's important to indicate who is male and who is female,[6] then juice up the descriptions with interpretive content like "Second parallel female lead". Really, someone in the Main cast is a lead? Is that woman a female? What's a parallel lead? Oh here we get "parallel female Lead Protagonist", so they're not only a protagonist, but a "Lead Protagonist". But they're not a *Main* Lead Protagonist, they're only a parallel Lead Protagonist. Who is a female. Other: [7] And here an IP editor adds "main", bringing descriptions to "Former Parallel Main Female Lead" and "Former Parallel Main Male Lead". So they're not only leads, they're parallel leads, and of the parallel leads, they're main parallel leads. This is an extreme example of the gender issue, where an IP editor divides the main cast into male and female sections. Very bizarre. From June 2017, another example of "Main Male Lead Protagonist" and similar. IP apparently doesn't get that they're writing in the "Main" section, so overloading "Main Lead Protagonist" is obnoxiously redundant. From October 2017 this edit introduced the hilarious "Main 2nd Male Lead". So long as we don't confuse him for the Lesser 2nd Male Lead... As of September 2018, this was still happening.
  • Removal of prose in favor of parentheticals - Some find clearly written prose offensive to the eyes, preferring grotesque parentheticals instead. "Jane Doe as Judy Smith - Led the French resistance until she was killed in a cognac fire at the end of season one." vs "Jane Doe as Judy Smith/Baklava/Judy Parikh (fake name) (2015-2016)(Dead)(Second parallel female Antagonist)" More examples:[8][9] and "Fake" here.
    • Excessive parentheticals in general - [10]
  • Removal of clarification templates - Clarification templates keep getting removed without problems being resolved.[11]
  • Excessive columns - People insistent upon creating columns for a four item bullet list.[12]
  • Former cast section - Multiple editors keep creating "Former cast" sections oblivious to WP:TVCAST and our need to know whether someone was part of the Main or Recurring cast. Do embedded notes and talk page comments work? No. An example here where "Former" cast appears and refnotes pointing to an explanation of a cast member's departure were removed, because knowledge and clarity is the enemy. Another example here and here that despite clear notes, their cookie-cutter article template must be protected. In this edit, a user moves a bunch of people to a "Former cast" section, but that series is slated to end in 3 weeks. Would we then have to move everybody into the Former cast section?
    • Cast deletion - A subset of the Former cast phenomenon is the deletion of cast members who have departed a TV series. Like here where Shilpa Shinde was removed from |starring= because she's no longer on the show. Although I can understand the logic of this choice, this is contrary to {{Infobox television}} and WP:TVCAST. We've also seen this behavior in cast sections, e.g. with Shivani Tomar being deleted. Another example here, where a user removes Shilpa Shinde despite there being clear sourced prose about her departure from this soap opera. Also here from the Starring parameter. In the Campaign of Ignorance, a person ceases to be relevant when they leave a TV show... Other examples here, here and here.
  • Deleting sub-sections - Why have Main and Recurring sections at all when you can delete them? A general hodgepodge is better than having some structure.[13]
  • Unnecessary captions - IP editor adding captions describing obvious title cards,[14] contravening Infobox instructions and ignoring the very obvious note. In this case even adding a caption for a non-existent image. I previously blocked this user, IP 77.102.106.5, for the same Campaign of Ignorance stuff.
  • Focus on fictional family trees - Apparently the most important thing to communicate in a TV cast list, is how everybody is related. On the other hand, someone will eventually come by strip out any details beyond names, with no explanation.[15]
  • Hodgepodge cast ordering - One editor in particular at 27.6.50.164 (Telangana, India) can't wrap their head around the idea that per WP:TVCAST, new additions to a TV cast go at the bottom of the list. Though the cast list at Naagin (2015 TV series) is currently organized with S1 performers at the top of the Main cast list, the IP keeps moving Karanvir Bohra (a S2 performer) above S1 actors.[16][17][18] and here as an IPv6 user
  • Plot bloat - Sort of the flip-side to the promotion of ignorance thing, but generally across Indian TV articles, particularly the soap opera types, there's a push to write up massive text walls about the series' plot. The walls are very often poorly written, many times incomprehensible, and tend to ramble about episode-by-episode developments instead of the general shape of the series, which is the aim of WP:TVPLOT. Despite recommendations [19][20] to set up an episode list, nobody ever takes me up on it, they just go back to the plot bloat. Examples: Kasam Tere Pyaar Ki, Ishqbaaaz, Ishqbaaaz, Naagin, Naagin. Here a user asks me why I removed his plot contribution, despite the fact that I explained it in my edit summary, the plot section contains a giant maintenance template instructing that the section should be trimmed, and there is an explanation embedded into the maintenance template code. Just more examples of how it is difficult to reach people.
  • Nicknames - Normally when indicating a person's nickname, we'll write Sarah "Fergie" Ferguson. This editor decides this standard English convention is too clear, and instead uses ambiguous parentheticals to communicate this. Here the editor moves the quoted abbreviation after the character's name. How is that better? Here at Mammootty film Shylock, we have a clear description of the character: Mammootty as loan shark Devan, who is also referred to as "Vaal" (transl. Tail), and also as "Shylock", a slang term for a loan shark. Yet the IP comes by and stuffs "Vaal" in parentheses removing any information about what it means, and also deletes the explanation of what a shylock is, because apparently we don't need to know why the film is titled that? Choices like these are completely incomprehensible.
  • Mumbai, not Bombay! - Some editors, like this one, have trouble understanding that we use the name of a place as it was called when the subject was born. Prior to 1995, Mumbai was called Bombay, so Bhumi Pednekar, who was born in 1989, was born in Bombay, not Mumbai. This happens for various cities, not just Mumbai. Oddly, when you say that King Nebuchadnezzar II was king of Babylonia, nobody ever changes it to Iraq.
  • Episodic Role, Supporting Role, Recurring Role meme - I don't know who to attribute this to, but circa late 2019 I started noticing someone or some people, have been loading actor filmographies with these weird labels in the notes section. See Indian IP 116.206.203.199, two 197.231.* African IPs, this Aksh Mondal sockpuppet, Indian IP 203.114.233.33, Indian IP 116.193.128.27 etc. It's almost always miscapitalised "Episodic Role", and it's totally unclear to me how the user(s) who adds it are differentiating in their mind between what "Epsodic Role" means, vs. "Supporting Role" and "Recurring Role". A recurring role is clear-cut. I know what that means. But does "episodic role" mean that they were in one episode? Or that they were in multiple episodes? And then depending on what that means, how is that different from a supporting role or a recurring role? How is a supporting role different from a recurring role? You can have a recurring role that is also a supporting role. Anyway, it's a mess of confusion, and it's spreading. Here's one from July 2020.
  • Unsorted ignorance - How in the world can a 22-minute sitcom with almost 1400 episodes have only one main cast member? Why would someone use symbols in encyclopedic prose instead of clear words? Circa October 2020, someone started going out of their way to label TV article sections "Linguistic versions". What does that even mean?

A glimmer of hope?[edit]

  • So, circa July 2020, I started to notice some random glimmers of hope that efforts to repair these anti-intellectual memes are starting to inspire changes, like here where an anon has followed my lead either at that article or seeing it elsewhere, and noting with clear language that an actor replaced another actor. Whoa.
  • After changing multiple instances of the meaningless "Linguistic versions" section (see above) to "Versions in other languages", this guy seems to get the message.
  • Here someone appears to have noticed that "aka" all over the place is sloppy, and is trying to adhere to English norms of adding nicknames inside a character's full name. Similar here.
  • Here in Feb 2021, someone has finally understood the trouble of having forever expanding TV plot sections and has created a list of episodes!
  • Here in Feb 2021, someone thinks to explain that a cast member left the series and was replaced by the original actor who had the role. Nice!
  • Finally, in Feb 2021, instead of just slapping an antagonist label on a character, someone actually wrote a character description! "A con woman who deceives people to get money." Whoaaaa!

Sample of articles affected[edit]

Many, but not all, of the initial problems I started experiencing were in Tamil-language soap operas. Some were supernatural dramas.

However these issues transcend Tamil content and are all over Indian entertainment articles.

Editors involved[edit]

  • Roseness 12 - I think this was the first named user I encountered (circa April 2016) who struck me as going out of their way to munge articles. Weird headings like "Main Lead", pseudoheadings instead of L3 headings, vague "Additional Cast" or "Suppporting" instead of specific "Recurring cast".[21] Adding to plot sections that were already flagged as too long.[22][23][24] Adding leading zeroes to numerals, 01, 02, 03... circa August 2016.[25][26] This coincided with IP 77.102.106.5 doing the same thing within a few hours of Roseness.[27] Attempts to communicate with Roseness were not fruitful. I don't get the sense they understood any of what I was trying to explain to them, which presents real competence obstacles.
  • Arnav19 - Created scores of articles, each containing a dozen or more basic MOS errors. Had to contact him several times, each time he assured me he would fix the problems, but never did, and kept creating articles based on his shitty templates. Eventually brought him to AN to get other admins to look at him. He was ultimately indeffed for copyright violations. Kailash brought him to the 3RR board months prior. As of January 2016 I'm still cleaning up after Arnav.
  • 73.189.117.30 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - Many problems from this IP starting circa August 2016. Had to block 4 times so far. Competence? Comprehension? Repeated misuse of preceded_by and followed_by parameters. Also made weird edits like this where they needed to point out that 924 was greater than 900. - Geolocates to Union City, California; ISP: Comcast
  • 77.102.106.5 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - May be related to HamzaShahid2001 based on 2-hour editing proximity at Hum News after it was created by Hamza. - Geolocates to Birmingham, UK; ISP: Virgin Media - Blocked IP a number of times, initially as a suspected sock of Roseness, based on the MOS violations. Blocked 6 months circa 16 December 2016 - Based on this intersection, they might be related to Vicky12333, who has significant competence issues and poor communication skills. Vicky also edited in the world of Indian Hindi-language TV.
    • 86.1.245.204 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - Might be related to 77.102.106.5. Same geolocation, seems to be following IP around, like here where they remove an embedded note about leading zeroes at an article that was also polluted by 77.102.106.5.
    • 86.2.45.233 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - (30 April 2017) Similar to the IP directly above, I think this one might also be related to 77.102.106.5, since again they're following 77.102.* around. Here they remove a comment from 77.102.*'s talk page. Here they manipulate a comment left by 77.102. Here they leave a comment signing as 77.102.*. I will be blocking this IP. (Blocked May 1, 2017) As of June 2017, they're back editing Indian TV articles as well as other articles. Here they fill out the episode count of a TV show in advance of the airing, writing "As of 9 June 2017" when it's not yet 9 June 2017. They still haven't figured out how to sign their comments, as they again use the signature format from 77.102.106.5, so it's obviously the same person evading a block at 77.102.* I also think that Priyanshu shishodia is probably related, and/or Priyanshu shishodia is a sock of Vicky12333. They've been really heavy at Naagin (TV series) and have numerous substantial intersections with previous Vicky socks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:19, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
  • 50.174.14.221 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - Circa Dec 2016 - Hayward, California; ISP: Comcast - same issues. Is apparently aware that the preceded_by/followed_by parameters keep getting deleted ("Preceded and followed is helpful!!!!!!! STOP ERASING IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!") but apparently doesn't get or care why this is problematic. - Blocked 1 week 19 Dec 2016. After block expiration, made these edits [28][29], commenting "DO NOT CHANGE THIS AT ALL IT BUGS ME WHEN YOU DO AND IT'S SO FOOLISH WHEN YOU DO IT!!!!! SO STOP!!!!!!!!" and "STOP DELETING THIS IT'S HELPFUL". Also same preceded_by/followed_by crap here: [30][31][32] Some of these articles are almost only edited by Arnav19. - Blocked 2 weeks.
  • 2601:640:8102:b930:6cb2:f68e:26f8:a378 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - Daly City, California; ISP: Comcast - Removal of clarify templates with no effort to fix issues. Conversions to pseudoheadings here: [33]
  • 202.67.80.177 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - Auburn, Australia; ISP: Primus Telecommunications - Removal of cast members from articles, typically the removal of Shivani Tomar from Kasam Tere Pyaar Ki. User has claimed that Tomar didn't appear on the series, despite the clear evidence that she did.[34][35][36] User has done this sort of thing before, like here where they wipe one actor off the face of the page, because I guess they think we should only know the most current actor. They also did that earlier here where they remove Tomar and Nikhil Khurana.
  • Anas5555 - Encountered in early January 2017. Getting a lot interpretive labels like "Parallel Male Lead" and "Main Female Protagonist". Not a huge problem yet, but concerning. As of 27 January 2017, I've left two notes for him about this.
  • 103.233.141.105 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - India - Seven Star Internet Service Provider - "Main Male Lead Protagonist" / "Second Male Lead Protagonist / Main Lead Antogonist"

Misc notes for Cyphoidbomb[edit]

  • 85.2.229.213 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - Interesting Swiss IP that showed up to flesh out an article created by Arnav19 - Circa Dec 2016 - Misuses followed_by parameter here. Shows up to edit another one of Arnav's articles here. Creates episode list (first one of those I've ever seen in one of these articles) adds summaries in Tamil. Hmm...
  • 86.1.245.204 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - March 2017 - Birmingham, UK; Virgin - Getting started with leading zeroes[37][38] and obvious captions[39]. Added caption to infobox when there wasn't even a photo.[40] Had issues earlier, with user removing embedded notes[41] and maintenance templates.[42]
  • 188.62.231.100 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - July 2018 - per an emailed tip, this Swiss IP shows up to ask Abishe to recreate some of the pages Arnav19 created as Thilakshan.
  • 85.0.236.168 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - October 2018 - Another Swiss IP following Sham65 (another Arnav19 sock) around. A few weeks later, this IP admits to being Thilakshan. Surprise!

Arnav articles in need of inspection / cleanup[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Cyphoidbomb/Campaign_of_Ignorance&oldid=1009237572"