Get Ready for Randy

Next is a perfect and even legendary example of unfair and bias events which lead to the block of a remarkable editor RandyKnotts.
That editor then filed a block appeal and the appeal process itself was also abused by even more admins piling on.
The gross mishandling of the appeal demonstrates the impunity these dubious admins operate with.
Then after speaking up about the blatantly improper appeal review, the editor's issue was escalated to a serious incident.
The escalation was executed by a bad-faith UTRS admin Josh Gordon just as it had become fully apparent that the involved admins all looked utterly horrible for their actions.
This particular serious incident escalation seemed more like a plead from the admins to be saved from themselves. It screamed make it end already,
because we've been fully cooked.
The outsider RandyKnotts' ability to communicate expertly all of the wrongs happening to him in real time was incredible
and worthy of a summer blockbuster.
Yet with the callousness and arrogance of no valid justification really needed, top admins put the final nail in the editor's coffin
with a removal of his talk page access.
That means that the only place left where an editor can communicate, ask for help, or respond to his or her talk page posts,
is no longer available to them. That talk-page-denied editor is completely prevented from posting about any issues no matter how egregious and improper toward him or her.
It's the ultimate execution of the editor. They're totally silenced.
An editor whose very own talk page access is revoked can't even publicly appeal their block as would normally happen on their talk page. To appeal, they must go through a private system.
In a private form appeal, the blocked contributor is even less likely to be treated fairly due to that much less transparency.
Normally, when an editor is blocked, they atleast continue to be able to post on their own talk page and that's the only place they're allowed.
Wikipedia typically leaves talk page access open so it can maintain a (false) sense of hope and fairness, in that any editor can someday, even if
many years later, be unblocked and restored to a basic editor. However with RandyKnotts, admins urgently shut him up because the editor knew he was on moral high ground and just wouldn't back down.
They don't want the talk page used effectively against corrupt admins.
It's similar to how a casino will kick out a poker player who isn't breaking any rules simply because he or she is beating the casino royally.

Admin abuse is common on Wikipedia. It can appear subtle at first, especially to an uninitiated editor without a trained eye.
It's often done with passive aggressive language and
usually starts off with superficial niceties.
When you overlook any sea, the surface of the water appears calm, but just underneath that surface are big fish chewing smaller fish's heads off.
The big fish on Wikipedia are much more sophisticated than your favorite
salt water fish. An admin will often hide complex
political reasons for eating a potential rival, and
they'll mask their admin actions as something else noble,
which deceptively seems valid at first glance.
What's most remarkable about this Wikipedia story of admin abuse is the exceptional knowledge of internal guidelines by RandyKnotts,
coupled with his ability to respond perfectly to sink any shred of false legitimacy put forth by corrupts admins like Jim F. Bleak.
Most people after being treated the way this editor was, would have told one of the abusing admins to chew some slightly molded hay already.
That would have given the admins exactly what they're using to getting, the appearance of a justified block which is what they were desperately desiring.
Each response from RandyKnotts served to leave a beautiful and extremely well documented case of Wikipedia abuse for the knowledge loving ages,
which went all the way to the top of Wikipedia's structure. RandyKnotts is the most talented and skilled person ever known to
challenge Wikipedian admin abuse.
These events happened over a period of weeks in September 2025.
There are admins who shockingly state in all seriousness that
there is no authority above theirs.
Their grandiose self-perceived power within the environment drips off them like drool from a greedy pig.
Wikipedia has certainly winded down a dark path
from its humble and noble beginnings.
Ironically, this story happened while Wikipedia was already under public scrutiny in the news on a daily basis for the same things, proving that their admins have no intention of changing their ways.
Many of the admins wielding power abusively may even have mental health conditions which would prevent them from
being able to stop without an intervention.
Much of the public has recently become aware of gross abuses by Wikipedian admins regarding some well publicized events.
Those injustices are only a small fraction of the overall problem with corruption, bad-faith editing, and malicious admin retaliations that go on routinely at the famous encyclopedia.

© Copyright. All rights reserved.