On Sept 5, 2007, someone vandalized the wikipedia.org article on Etsy. This is the 5th time this person has made this specific edit, (erasing the entire section on privacy) and the same edit has also been made by two other IP addresses. One of those IP addresses was also used to impersonate two editors at EtsyNews.
This is the history of all edits to the Etsy article on wikipedia.org
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Etsy&action=history
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/24.5.196.172
This person has erased the privacy section 5 times, without any explanation or justification.
They were blocked by Wikipedia on August 10, but they have apparently been unblocked and are continuing to vandalize the article. Twice on September 5.
Here is the talk page for that person, where they were told they have been blocked from editing any more wikipedia articles on August 10. (the block must have expired though, because they are back to vandalizing this month) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:24.5.196.172
UPDATE: The user has again been blocked on Sept. 12.
Some info on that ID 24.5.196.172 may be found at
http://www.ip2location.com/demo.aspx
It resolves to Berkeley, CA.
***
One of the prior deletions made to the Privacy section of the Etsy article on wikipedia.com was made on June 22, 2007 by an anonymous user. Wikipedia displays the anonymous user with this IP address:
71.58.222.47
Some info on that ID may be found at
http://www.ip2location.com/demo.aspx
It resolves to New Jersey.
On that same day, June 22, 2007, the same IP address posted 2 comments to threads here at UEN- impersonating 2 UEN editors: Soap and Gemmafactrix. (no longer an editor)
The email address the impersonator submitted when posting the comment as “soap” is one which soap uses solely in connection with her Etsy selling account & official Etsy activities such as transactions. The email address used by the impersonator is not the email address soap uses at etsynews.com. The only people who would know the email address soap uses for her etsy account are: people who have bought and sold from her, and etsy staff.
***
The third anonymous user who has made this same edit to the wikipedia.org article on Etsy did so with the IP number 151.197.12.194 on June 29, 2007.
Some info on that ID may be found at
http://www.ip2location.com/demo.aspx
It resolves to Philadelphia, PA.
For previous coverage of this issue, see this UEN article
http://etsynews.com/281/controversial-edits-to-etsys-article-on-wikipedia-specifically-privacy-issues/
September 22nd, 2007 at 7:59 pm
It is all very strange.
I am assuming soap has had many sales on Etsy and the buyer can see the email on the receipt, (which I hate! I see no need for it to be public info since we have convos available)
The other addresses associated with this vandalism were known to me to be associated with Etsy. I saw the connection immediatly. If you are informed about Etsy it is easy to make the connection. An intelligent person trying to frame someone would cover all of their bases.
I don’t necessarily think that is the case. I really just want to examine all possible answers.
September 22nd, 2007 at 7:25 pm
That’s an interesting idea, JD. I don’t know how someone would go about doing that, but I would assume if someone was trying to frame Etsy, and was somehow spoofing their own IP number (which is possible) the most logical thing would be to spoof a Brooklyn IP number. Everyone knows Etsy is in Brooklyn.
It would be very convoluted to spoof an IP from a city that very few people associate with Etsy. (or 3 cities, at last count)
And of course there’s also the question, of how did the impostor know Soap’s Etsy email address?
September 22nd, 2007 at 7:21 pm
QUESTION:
Can someone explain to me the significance of the UEN Wiki article and how it may have contributed to some people being banned?
September 22nd, 2007 at 7:14 pm
Would it be possible, for someone who has a beef against Etsy, to make this look some someone from Etsy was doing this vandalism? I suppose they would have to be very clever.
If it is someone from Etsy, I really hope they handle this soon. I agree a company should be able to admit to the truth about themselves.
September 18th, 2007 at 8:38 am
Ten comments from this thread were removed due to the high potential for antagonism, which is abuse of this site. For the sake of the public record, the comments have been re-posted. However, we request that all future comments stay on topic.
September 18th, 2007 at 8:03 am
id like to chew someones arm off. oh, wait, make that heads.
i am deeply sadden and offended by it, truly.
how could something so good grow into something so tacky.
September 17th, 2007 at 10:16 pm
I’m trying hard to keep an open mind too. But I just wanted to say that this quote stood out from magickal realism above:
“a good company can handle telling the truth about itself, and having the truth told about itself, even when it’s bad”
That’s so true. And it’s also interesting that you got that from taking PR-related studies. For such a long time I’ve been saying that Etsy desperately needs PR and communications specialist to help them better manage so many things - including relationships with their own customers. Plus they need to realise that a publicist and a PR person are not the same thing!
A good PR/Communications professional would probably rather chew off their own arm than go about things the way that Etsy has been seen to be of late.
September 17th, 2007 at 11:44 am
thanks for keeping us up to date.
it’s either someone who doesn’t read UEN or someone incredibly arrogant doing this
… and i agree with magickal about the slide in corporate culture and being mature enough to handle the truth, tho I’m still trying to keep an open mind about who is responsible
September 17th, 2007 at 2:20 am
Someone removed the privacy section again today.
(cur) (last) 22:11, 16 September 2007 24.7.71.132 (Talk) (13,967 bytes) (undo)
another Berkeley, CA IP address.
Same ISP as the other Berkeley vandal (comcast)
September 17th, 2007 at 2:05 am
How very frustrating, especially for someone like me to watch. When people inside a company start handling criticism by trying to silence it, it’s a warning sign that personal politics is going to start an ethical and financial downslide where, in the end, the customers (and in this case, their customers are their sellers) will suffer. One of the first things they taught me when I was taking mass comm classes and PR training: a good company can handle telling the truth about itself, and having the truth told about itself, even when it’s bad. That is the mature, adult thing to do.
Besides which, Wikipedia has specifically published the IPs of those who change the content to stomp on that kind of trashy corporate behavior.