Gaslighting on Wikipedia

You might be thinking that surely there are some decent admins that will recognize the butchering which just occured by a bad-faith admin,
and step in to atleast suggest the draft be appropriately restored for Teahouse. Not at all.
What happens next is a saga that will be enshrined in Wikipedia history.
Editor RandyKnotts was not about to just walk away without a full discussion and demanding to be treated fairly.
This saga goes all the way to the very top of Wikipedia and proves that bias and corruption is at every level.
It should have been a no-brainer that the draft be approved as an article by Teahouse or atleast given a standard six-month chance for improvement. In reality though, Jim F. Bleak intercepted the submitted draft before a
Teahouse admin could peform the normal fair process, and he simply
erased it all. Not even a second day or second draft was allowed to work
on Jim F. Bleak's bogus claim. That's because Jim F. Bleak was clearly wrong, he knew it, and he didn't care.
It seems to be the point actually. Remember, he loves to destroy more than create, and he takes egotistic satisfaction in getting his way about it.
Jim F. Bleak has blocked almost fourty thousand Wikipedian editors, mostly Americans. Some of his victims hadn't even edited for years.
RandyKnotts appropriately started by leaving a message on Jim F. Bleak's talk page respectfully asking for reinstatement of the draft,
while skillfully discrediting Jim F. Bleak's given reason about references.
At this point, the admin could have easily just
reinstated the draft article and moved on,
but he couldn't cope with the idea of doing a 180 because of a complaint. His reputation for being a ruthless admin
that always wins one way or the other was on the line.
Instead, Jim F. Bleak began a gaslighting campaign. He simply moved on to another reason completely unrelated to the bogus reason the draft was now
non-existent, and he did so with thick sarcasm. Ironically, his new excuse was that the tone of the draft was promotional he claimed.
Editor RandyKnotts argued that it wasn't,
but agreed anyway to rephrase or omit any lines that
Jim F. Bleak had decided were of a non-neutral tone.
This olive branch was thrown back at RandyKnotts. The admin never had any intention of being reasonable.
He simply dropped those excuses and moved on to yet another, the subject wasn't notable enough he now claimed.
Along with each new excuse, the abusive admin included some measure of dismission and condescension in his remarks increasing the growing tension.
A forming audience of stalking hyaena-like admins began to build, waiting to nip away.

Though fully aware of being gaslighted, RandyKnots surgically responded and calmly detailed how the subject was provably notable.
Then, in light of the new bad-faith objections being well overcome, he again requested reinstatement of the draft,
also pointing out that it was standard Teahouse procedure to receive six months as a chance to improve upon any objections.
One of the stalking admins already nipping and growling, a friend of Jim F. Bleak called SarekofVulcan, began to further gang attack with false statements about Teahouse.
He absurdly claimed the mentioned Teahouse procedures
weren't true and with a gaseous tone.
It almost seemed that the undeserving admins were completely ignorant of Teahouse procedures because they weren't involved with it or authorized by Teahouse to review drafts.
Either that, or they were bold faced lying about it. Given their years of Wikipedia trolling, the latter is assumed.
By this point, it's obvious that Jim F. Bleak was never going to undo anything.
The draft article was in the trash exactly where he wanted it, and now all he wanted was RandyKnotts dispatched too.
He continued to move from new excuse to new excuse, and each was properly dismantled for what it was,
bogus excuses to not right the malicious wrong.
The admin buckled down and further ratcheted up his gaslighting games with even more personally insulting language
and by fracturing the discussion.
Discussion fracturing is when a person continues the discussion for no apparent reason on an entirely different page, only adding confusion
and making it difficult to follow along clearly with what's happening.
The editor immediately stayed with Jim F. Bleak moving to his own talk page where the discussion continued.
He responded just as skillfully and made it clear that the fracturing was harmful to the issue, and requested that
the discussion now stay on his talk page where Jim F. Bleak had inappropriately moved it to, to avoid any further confusion.
The seething admin began to post that he didn't even see the point in continuing the discussion, and implied that
the editor was incapable of understanding him.
RandyKnotts continued by dismantling each post by the admin.
Suddenly the admin moved the conversation back to his own talk page and then abruptly back again to the editor's talk page,
with even more bad-faith objections and gaslighting.
Then in an emphatic outburst, Jim F. Bleak unexpectedly proclaimed he must now move on, because as he claimed,
he hadn't even been answered about a (ridiculous) inquiry he'd made,
but RandyKnotts had answered and skillfully at that,
but on the other talk page where the admin had posted it.

© Copyright. All rights reserved.