Most Popular

  • The Principal Matter
    Teachers said Principal Gil Cho was dictatorial. Students said he manhandled them. The school district said he was doing a good job.
  • Nonconformity Still Reigns!
    The top eccentrics of San Francisco, and that's saying something.
  • He's No Angel
    They once called him a savior who helped people in need. Today, Edwin Parada is accused of taking money from Latinos unfamiliar with real estate laws.
  • A Time to Kill
    The SPCA is struggling to finance a new hospital, and one way to save money is to speed up euthanasia.
  • State of the Cart
    Join us as we map the street food scene and find out why there aren't more vendors in this most food-involved and temperate of cities.

Recent Articles

Recent Articles by Mary Spicuzza

National Features >

  • City Pages

    "Governor No"

    Minnesota's Tim Pawlenty grooms himself for vice-presidential consideration--by being a jerk.

    By Jonathan Kaminsky

  • Miami New Times

    Day Strippers

    Our reporter sets out in search of a naked lunch.

    By Janine Zeitlin

  • Broward-Palm Beach New Times

    Switch Hitter

    Before swinging a bat in a lesbian softball league, pick a side: gay or straight?

    By Amy Guthrie

  • Village Voice

    Death in the Skies

    At JFK, Erhan Yildirim clears corpses for takeoff.

    By Elizabeth Dwoskin

Wikipedia Idiots: The Edit Wars of San Francisco

Continued from page 3

Published on February 13, 2008

Despite my best efforts, Griot still wasn't giving me the time of day. My editor wondered if I was being too polite; he thought I needed to bait Griot by editing one of his entries. I didn't want to go there, but I did tempt Griot by posting a comment about one of his hot-button subjects.

Those affiliated with the Green Party seem to especially strike a nerve with Griot. He has engaged in numerous wars over Ralph Nader's entry. Late last month, Griot wrote: "Now my question is how to address the fact that Nader's biggest impact was in 2000. That belongs at the top of both articles. No more white-washing, please." He wrote to rival editor Boodles-thecat on his user talk page: "Nader would have been a footnote to the elections if not for his role in 2000 in Florida. I'd appreciate if you wouldn't insist on glozing [sic] over this fact, as much as you may dislike it."

Another user, one going by only an IP address, leapt into battle and pointed out other concerns in the 2000 elections, especially vote caging and voter fraud concerns.

Again, Griot wasn't having it. "R .. A .. L ........ P .. H .. N .......... A .. D .. E .. E ... R," he wrote, posting a link to a YouTube video featuring the Mickey Mouse Club — complete with Annette Funicello.

I saw my opportunity. "So, Griot," I wrote, "is it safe to say that you put Ralph Nader and Mickey Mouse in the same club, then? I just want to make my article as accurate as possible."

The words "Griot Speaks" promptly appeared on my user talk page.

"That was a reference to the Ralph Nader Fan Club, a club whose name I mentioned to someone with whom I was exchanging messages," Griot quickly responded. "I wouldn't read much into it or take it personally."

Then he got right to the point. "Why all the interest in me? Why the five invitations to be in your article, four more than you offered anyone else? What's the dang deal?"

He also promptly pasted my messages into a section on his user talk page, titled "Mary Spicuzza Pitches Woo." It was later changed to "Mary Spicuzza Pitches Woo 7 Times!"

My messages didn't seem inflammatory or rude. The first one read, "My name is Mary Spicuzza and I'm a reporter with SF Weekly. I'm working on an article about Wikipedia and I'd love to speak with you. May I give you a call?"

Another: "Hi Griot. I'm still working on that article and would really like to get your perspective on Wikipedia — especially on how San Francisco is represented in the encyclopedia. I'm on deadline, so the sooner the better for me. Thanks for your time."

Alas, Griot seemed to have no interest in being interviewed in person or over the phone.

I decided I had to get a little more pushy: I let Griot know he or she had become the main focus of the article. Maybe that would bring him or her out into the open.

Shortly thereafter, the words "Why me?" appeared on my user talk page. Griot was unhappy with being the focus of a news story.

"If it matters to you, and I suspect it doesn't, it's not something I would wish for," Griot wrote. "But since my wishes are being ignored, I just have to ask: 'Why me?' Is it my elegant prose? Did my many fans — they throw flowers at my feet and sometimes fire off one-gun salutes in my honor (hope you mention that in your article) — steer you to me? Your aunt? [I think he meant my sister.] I make my living partly as a journalist and writer, so I know how these things work. I just hope you're fair even though you never interviewed me or asked for my permission to do this.

"Is that fair to someone you don't really know?" he continued. "I teach at City College. I don't dare give you my name or the name of my business. I've had people from Wikipedia send me videos of them firing guns in response to my edits on gun control issues. I have other less mortal reasons for being anonymous."

Okay, for those of you keeping score at home: Griot is a teacher at City College, a record-store owner, and a journalist and writer. This is one busy Wikipedian.

Still, Griot had a point. Wikipedia is a public forum, and seemingly every discussion about an entry or a user talk page is open for the world to see. But just because a Wiki-pedian makes edits on a public forum doesn't mean he or she wants to divulge information about his or her virtual or real-life identity.

Show All« Previous Page   1   2   3   4   5   Next Page »

SF Weekly Insiders

  • Local food, music and news blasts
  • Free Stuff
Backpage.com