Goanna article in EN Wikipedia has been nominated for deletion

[BenFenner]

Interesting you think I was in any way shooting the messenger with my post or with my line of questions (which you still have not answered).

the issue with the subject was that there wasn't notable coverage from reliable sources

And yes I read everything sent in this thread, the sources themselves aren't very notable

Which is it? Do the sources have to be notable, or do they have to be reliable? This is maddening. It's perfectly acceptable to shoot the messenger when they are a horrible messenger (irrespective of the message).

[Gemmaugr]

The issue with what's Notable and/or Reliable is that it becomes a popularity circle-jerk with in-group bias.

There could be a hundred other sites/articles mentioning Goanna, and only two mentioning Gecko, but if the Powers-That-Be don't consider the 100 good and/or consider the two good, then they'll act upon the aforementioned set up.

Deleting the Goanna article isn't going to help Goanna become more known and talked about in Weighted Articles either, and OmegaAOL/LordSigdis/Samomega's and other Browser Warriors misinformation of Reddit regarding Pale Moon and Goanna doesn't either.

Even the Basilisk article on Wikipedia falsely says it's a Firefox Fork..

[BenFenner]

Sure, but to be fair, that's what Wikipedia wants to be. Or the best they can come up with anyway. Seems the system is working as intended there, and I'm not sure I disagree.

I disagree with different parts of what's happening/happened. But I digress.

[Gemmaugr]

Sure, but to be fair, that's what Wikipedia wants to be

What the current Wikipedia wants perhaps, but not what the founder Larry Sanger wanted.

[andyprough]

> You have to see how that reads extremely disingenuous. Was there some proverbial gun to your head making you nominate the article for deletion? You'd think an "inclusionist" would never nominate articles for deletion, and certainly not argue for it in the talk page. I can see one way that this somehow makes any logical sense. But how do you square these two things in your mind?

The answer is simple: I don't own Wikipedia. I'm not even the guy who pressed the Delete button on the article. My only role here is providing arguments for the actual deleter to make his decision. Despite me thinking it would be better if Wikipedia served as a knowledge hub more than a strict encyclopedia, that's not what it is. That's not the reality. And given so, I will do my best to follow what consensus has decided the encyclopedia should look like.

You have not answered the question at all - you were not asked if you own Wikipedia or pressed a Delete button. You were asked if there was some proverbial gun to your head making you nominate the article for deletion. What you've argued here is called the logical fallacy of a red herring which refers to a tactic where someone distracts from the main issue by introducing irrelevant information or arguments.

If you will not answer questions about your motives for your nomination and arguments for deletion and you continue to attempt to dissemble and distract away from questions about your biased motives, then I will soon nominate you and your comments for deletion from this forum. I'm not buying your statement that your Skyfox browser was just "a fun experiment for a few days" - your actions the past few weeks indicate quite the contrary. I'm giving you your first warning.

[BenFenner]

I will answer one final time. I didn't think it was notable enough so I recommended it to be merged into the Pale Moon article.

I will ask again, why did you do such a thing if you're a self-described Wikipedia "inclusionist"?

[back2themoon]

Comparison of browser engines

If this deletion was part of a routine act to improve Wikipedia in any sort of way, a glance at the above article's contents instantly reveals it to be an act of incompetence. This is really bad, misguided editing. Getting administrator and "neutral Wikipedian" approval, doesn't make this routine act -or you as an unbiased editor- look any better.

On the flip side, the brief quote below merges it all.

Some can talk the talk, but actions always speak louder than words.

[BenFenner]

I feel this is an issue that we'll never agree on and we keep arguing without any visible goal.

A bit of bad faith on your end here. I reject your characterization. We are reasonable people, asking reasonable questions, which would be satisfied with reasonable answers.

I will answer one final time. I didn't think it was notable enough so I recommended it to be merged into the Pale Moon article.

I will ask again, why do you do such a thing if you're a self-described Wikipedia "inclusionist"?

Because my views don't shape my duties as an editor, and even if they did my philosophy (and why I describe myself as such) largely revolves around data not being lost.

Got it. So I ask again:

What would have happened to you had you not nominated this article for deletion? What would have happened to you had you not strongly argued for deletion in the talk page? What would have happened to you had you argued against deletion in the talk page?

How about we put aside our differences and work on improving the main Pale Moon article together?

No thank you. (You're welcome to do so on your own.) I already suggested a much better communal path forward:

To move forward, I believe the easiest thing to do is to grab the last good copy of the [Goanna] article, improve it ourselves until it unquestionably* meets the inclusion standards of Wikipedia, and then drop it back off to see what happens then.

[BenFenner]

As a springboard (and for posterity) here are the contents of the article in question as of 2026-06-01 (a few days before it was nominated for deletion):

Code: Select all

{{Short description|Open source browser engine}}
{{Primary sources|date=January 2024}}
{{Infobox software
| name                   = Goanna
| logo                   = [[File:Goanna layout engine logo.png|frameless|upright=0.8|alt=Goanna logo]]
| released =  January 2016<ref name="26note"/>
| developer              = M. C. Straver<ref name="Straver">{{cite web |url=http://www.moonchildproductions.info/about.shtml |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170313050503/http://www.moonchildproductions.info/about.shtml |title=About Moonchild Productions |author=M.C. Straver |archive-date=2017-03-13 |access-date=2018-04-19 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
| programming language   = [[C++]]
| genre                  = [[Browser engine]]
| license                = [[Mozilla Public License|MPL]] 2.0
| website                = {{URL|https://www.palemoon.org/tech/goanna.shtml}}
}}

'''Goanna''' is an [[Open-source software|open-source]] [[browser engine]] and part of Unified XUL Platform that was [[Fork (software development)|forked]] from [[Mozilla]]'s [[Gecko (software)|Gecko]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.palemoon.org/tech/goanna.shtml |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230124144046/https://www.palemoon.org/tech/goanna.shtml |title=The Goanna layout engine |author=M.C. Straver |archive-date=2023-01-24 |access-date=2023-01-24 |url-status=live |work=Pale Moon website }}</ref> It is used in the [[Pale Moon]] and [[Basilisk (web browser)|Basilisk]] browsers. It underlies the ''Interlink'' mail client, [[Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre|Hyperbola's]] fork of Basilisk known as Iceweasel-UXP, and other [[Pale Moon#Unified XUL Platform (UXP)|UXP]]-based [[application software|applications]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=62&t=17213|title=UXP vs goanna | work=forum.palemoon.org}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Iceweasel-UXP |url=https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id=en:system:userspace:application:uxp:iceweasel-uxp |access-date=2024-05-23 |website=Hyperbola}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=There is only XUL |url=http://thereisonlyxul.org/ |access-date=18 September 2018}}</ref> It was also unofficially ported to [[Windows XP]] for the [[K-Meleon]] browser<ref>{{cite web|url=http://kmeleonbrowser.org/forum/list.php?19|title=K-Meleon on Goanna|work=kmeleonbrowser.org}}</ref> and Mypal.<ref>[https://mypal-browser.org/ Mypal browser homepage]</ref>

== History ==
<!-- Note: White Star for MacOS technically uses a fork of the Goanna engine, since support for MacOS is officially being removed from Goanna, per https://repo.palemoon.org/MoonchildProductions/UXP/issues/1751 -->

Goanna as an independent fork of Gecko was first released in January 2016.<ref name="26note">{{cite web | url=http://www.palemoon.org/releasenotes-archived.shtml | title=Release notes for old versions of Pale Moon | work=palemoon.org }}</ref> The project's founder and lead [[Software developer|developer]], M. C. Straver,<ref name="Straver"/> cited technical- and trademark-related motives to do this in the context of [[Pale Moon (web browser)|Pale Moon]]'s increasing divergence from [[Firefox]].<ref>{{cite web |url = https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8607 |title = Introducing Goanna |publisher = M.C. Straver |date = 2015-06-22 |access-date = 2017-02-10 | work=Pale Moon forum }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Pale Moon to switch from Gecko to Goanna rendering engine|url=https://www.ghacks.net/2015/06/22/pale-moon-to-switch-from-gecko-to-goanna-rendering-engine/ |first1=Martin |last1=Brinkmann |work=ghacks.net|date=2015-06-22|access-date=2017-11-25}}</ref> There are two significant aspects of Goanna's divergence: it does not have any of the [[Rust (programming language)|Rust language]] components that were added to Gecko during Mozilla's [[Quantum (Mozilla)|Quantum project]],<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.basilisk-browser.org/ |website=basilisk-browser.org | title=Basilisk web browser | access-date=2018-04-18 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://wiki.mozilla.org/Quantum|title=Quantum |access-date=2018-04-18 | work=MozillaWiki }}</ref> and applications that use Goanna always run in single-[[Process (computing)|process]] mode, whereas Firefox became a multi-process application.<ref>{{cite web |title=Multiprocess Firefox |url=https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Multiprocess_Firefox |publisher=Mozilla Developer Network|access-date=24 August 2018 |archive-date=4 September 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150904032512/https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Multiprocess_Firefox |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Multi-process, or: the drawbacks nobody ever talks about. |url=https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=17442 |publisher=M.C. Straver |access-date=24 August 2018 |work=Pale Moon forum |date=2017-11-20 |archive-date=2020-11-11 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201111234959/https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=17442 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

==References==
{{Reflist|30em}}

{{Browser engines}}

[[Category:2016 software]]
[[Category:Cross-platform software]]
[[Category:Free layout engines]]
[[Category:Free software programmed in C++]]
[[Category:Gecko-based software]]
[[Category:Software forks]]
[[Category:Software that uses Cairo (graphics)]]
[[Category:Software using the Mozilla Public License]]

And from 2026-06-21 (very shortly before being deleted):

Code: Select all

{{Short description|Open source browser engine}}
{{Primary sources|date=January 2024}}
{{Infobox software
| name                   = Goanna
| logo                   = [[File:Goanna layout engine logo.png|frameless|upright=0.8|alt=Goanna logo]]
| released =  January 2016<ref name="26note"/>
| developer              = M. C. Straver<ref name="Straver">{{cite web |url=http://www.moonchildproductions.info/about.shtml |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170313050503/http://www.moonchildproductions.info/about.shtml |title=About Moonchild Productions |author=M.C. Straver |archive-date=2017-03-13 |access-date=2018-04-19 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
| programming language   = [[C++]]
| genre                  = [[Browser engine]]
| license                = [[Mozilla Public License|MPL]] 2.0
| website                = {{URL|https://www.palemoon.org/tech/goanna.shtml}}
}}

'''Goanna''' is an [[Open-source software|open-source]] [[browser engine]] and part of Unified XUL Platform that was [[Fork (software development)|forked]] from [[Mozilla]]'s [[Gecko (software)|Gecko]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.palemoon.org/tech/goanna.shtml |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230124144046/https://www.palemoon.org/tech/goanna.shtml |title=The Goanna layout engine |author=M.C. Straver |archive-date=2023-01-24 |access-date=2023-01-24 |url-status=live |work=Pale Moon website }}</ref> It is used in the [[Pale Moon]] and [[Basilisk (web browser)|Basilisk]] browsers. It underlies the ''Interlink'' mail client, [[Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre|Hyperbola's]] fork of Basilisk known as Iceweasel-UXP, and other [[Pale Moon#Unified XUL Platform (UXP)|UXP]]-based [[application software|applications]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=62&t=17213|title=UXP vs goanna | work=forum.palemoon.org}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Iceweasel-UXP |url=https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id=en:system:userspace:application:uxp:iceweasel-uxp |access-date=2024-05-23 |website=Hyperbola}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=There is only XUL |url=http://thereisonlyxul.org/ |access-date=18 September 2018}}</ref> It was also unofficially ported to [[Windows XP]] for the [[K-Meleon]] browser<ref>{{cite web|url=http://kmeleonbrowser.org/forum/list.php?19|title=K-Meleon on Goanna|work=kmeleonbrowser.org}}</ref> and Mypal.<ref>[https://mypal-browser.org/ Mypal browser homepage]</ref>

== History ==
<!-- Note: White Star for MacOS technically uses a fork of the Goanna engine, since support for MacOS is officially being removed from Goanna, per https://repo.palemoon.org/MoonchildProductions/UXP/issues/1751 -->

Goanna as an independent fork of Gecko was first released in January 2016.<ref name="26note">{{cite web | url=http://www.palemoon.org/releasenotes-archived.shtml | title=Release notes for old versions of Pale Moon | work=palemoon.org }}</ref> The project's founder and lead [[Software developer|developer]], M. C. Straver,<ref name="Straver"/> cited technical- and trademark-related motives to do this in the context of [[Pale Moon (web browser)|Pale Moon]]'s increasing divergence from [[Firefox]].<ref>{{cite web |url = https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8607 |title = Introducing Goanna |publisher = M.C. Straver |date = 2015-06-22 |access-date = 2017-02-10 | work=Pale Moon forum }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Pale Moon to switch from Gecko to Goanna rendering engine|url=https://www.ghacks.net/2015/06/22/pale-moon-to-switch-from-gecko-to-goanna-rendering-engine/ |first1=Martin |last1=Brinkmann |work=ghacks.net|date=2015-06-22|access-date=2017-11-25}}</ref> There are two significant aspects of Goanna's divergence: it does not have any of the [[Rust (programming language)|Rust language]] components that were added to Gecko during Mozilla's [[Quantum (Mozilla)|Quantum project]],<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.basilisk-browser.org/ |website=basilisk-browser.org | title=Basilisk web browser | access-date=2018-04-18 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://wiki.mozilla.org/Quantum|title=Quantum |access-date=2018-04-18 | work=MozillaWiki }}</ref> and applications that use Goanna always run in single-[[Process (computing)|process]] mode, whereas Firefox became a multi-process application.<ref>{{cite web |title=Multiprocess Firefox |url=https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Multiprocess_Firefox |publisher=Mozilla Developer Network|access-date=24 August 2018 |archive-date=4 September 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150904032512/https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Multiprocess_Firefox |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Multi-process, or: the drawbacks nobody ever talks about. |url=https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=17442 |publisher=M.C. Straver |access-date=24 August 2018 |work=Pale Moon forum |date=2017-11-20 |archive-date=2020-11-11 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201111234959/https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=17442 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

==References==
{{Reflist|30em}}

{{Browser engines}}

[[Category:2016 software]]
[[Category:Cross-platform software]]
[[Category:Free layout engines]]
[[Category:Free software programmed in C++]]
[[Category:Gecko-based software]]
[[Category:Software forks]]
[[Category:Software that uses Cairo (graphics)]]
[[Category:Software using the Mozilla Public License]]

Here's a useful sandbox for making and proposing edits:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sandbox

Or if you are logged in, you can use your own personal sandbox:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MyPage/sandbox

[ron_1]

For anybody who's interested here's a link to the Goanna article from the wayback machine:

https://web.archive.org/web/20260523185753/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goanna_(software)

FWIW, I'm very soured now on Wikipedia. The whole debacle seems dubious to me.

[andyprough]

I'm locking this topic now since @samomega is now PM'ing me threats to get Pale Moon developers and users banned from Wikipedia. Time to end @samomega's ability to stir up trouble here. I can unlock this topic later once this has been dealt with by the forum admins appropriately, if there is a reason to unlock it.

[Moonchild]

Keeping this locked for now but making sure people are aware it's been reported to WikiPedia staff now as the displayed behaviour and attempted manipulation into inaction through threats is very unbecoming of any wikipedia editor, regardless of status or age on there.
Apparently, samomega also "wanted to delete their forum account after making their first post in this thread" but look back here, does that seem like that's the case?

Either way, PLEASE keep the article's content safe just in case WikiPedia decides the article in fact does need to exist, so it can be restored rapidly.

[Admin]

Administrative action was taken against the account (and ban-dodging secondary account, not being content waiting for the time-out of a few days) of the bad faith Wiki editor after attempts at intimidation pretty much tantamount to harassment (including attempts at manipulating private message records).
This thread has been unlocked in case people want to continue discussing the now deleted article, general Wikipedia practices or how this in particular was handled.

[athenian200]

My position is that this situation with Wikipedia reminds me of the exact same forces that led to us having our own Gitea server instead of relying on GitHub. In general, the trend of this project has been the slow realization that we cannot trust any kind of public-facing infrastructure to give us a fair deal, and thus wind up relying heavily on our own infrastructure. Wikipedia is now no different. The rest of the web outside of our own infrastructure leans towards service refusals and treating us as non-notable.

I should also note I've been monitoring, and OmegaAOL has edited the Pale Moon Wikipedia page several times. While these edits appear to be reasonable edits and good faith attempts to improve the article on the surface rather than straight-up vandalism, I cannot help but wonder if that will always be the case in the future, given the enmity that has unfortunately been established and is likely now irreversible.

I will admit that I was hoping to try and reason with OmegaAOL, though I understand it likely wouldn't have worked anyway. I also wasn't particularly happy that people were not nice to him while he was posting here, but that's more because I believe in civility and making people feel heard as long as they are here engaging and should not be misconstrued as me being on his side. More accurate to say that I think rudeness or aggression on our part could always be weaponized against us and never makes us look good (IMO, it does not make us look strong or unwilling to take crap, it makes us look dramatic and toxic in the eyes of outsiders). In general, if there's even a small chance of turning an adversary into an ally or at least someone neutral, I tend to want to take that route rather than slog through a conflict.

I have looked into the rules on Wikipedia, and unfortunately my perception is that OmegaAOL understands how the bureaucracy at Wikipedia works. The fact is that Wikipedia often allows articles to stand unless someone raises an issue with them... while the procedural issues OmegaAOL cited and guidelines he invoked had some weight, the fact is that I think him choosing to bring the issue and choose this particular article at this time may well have motivated in part by animus against the project. Two things can be true at the same time. So we were not in a good position... technically not understanding Wikipedia procedure and starting off on the backfoot, him being in a position to use the rules against us, and Wikipedia not really caring about a person's motivation for asking rules be enforced all of a sudden after things were allowed to slide for years, with them shrugging and chalking it up to "backlog" and the implication that the article was only allowed to stand due to apathy on the part of editors up to that point.

The worst part is, a minefield has been setup for us if we ever touch our own Wikipedia article ever again. And there is probably nothing we could have done to avoid it, with any action we take more likely to be used against us or be ineffective than anything else. Everyone qualified to edit the article will probably have to declare a COI, which will draw attention to our edits to others on Wikipedia who will question our motives for editing and likely lead to more reversions of any edit we dare make. And in general we will only be allowed to touch our own article in extreme situations or with very careful justification. It's at the point where we would need to make friends on Wikipedia, probably make a few contributions to something well within their guidelines, and then ask for permission or guidance from people we trust on there, on basically anything we want to do if, for instance, there's actual vandalism of our article, etc. In which case maybe we'd be taken seriously. But our days of deciding basically anything about how our Wikipedia article looks are basically over, and its future will likely be decided by people who probably do not like our project and see it in a very dismissive light.

Overall... at this point, I'd say we either need to give up on Wikipedia or start building up good will there by editing unrelated articles hoping some grateful people will return the favor sooner or later by reverting any vandalism or unfair edits on articles we have a direct connection to or interest in. And unfortunately, I think he has quite the head start on us in that regard. That is my impression of how Wikipedia works after looking at what the rules formally are and then at what actually happens, though take this with a grain of salt.

[Moonchild]

After this, I certainly have no interest in contributing further to WikiPedia in any form (I occasionally improve articles that lie in my fields of expertise, which are pretty diverse and generally academic-level) which will be a net loss for them. But I'm just not going to accept the premise of assholes. My account on WikiPedia will be removed by my own volition. No need to ban me, I withdraw, permanently and indefinitely.

[solitude]

Off-topic:
What if Pale Moon had a wiki on it it's official website?

[Moonchild]

Off-topic:
What if Pale Moon had a wiki on it it's official website?

That would be utterly pointless. The point of WikiPedia is that it is a commonly used reference. But I guess its use will be greatly diminished now anyway as more people use ai chat for primers on subjects

[UCyborg]

But I'm just not going to accept the premise of assholes. My account on WikiPedia will be removed by my own volition. No need to ban me, I withdraw, permanently and indefinitely.

I agree with your position. The outcome with this article appears to be another example of the fact that this world is ruled by unreasonable people and assholes.

Reasonable ones are a dying breed.

There was no reason to go out of the way to delete it. You're not improving Wikipedia in any way by doing so.

[honorific]

This is unfortunately how Wikipedia has worked for quite a long time now. The rules are very much centered around 'reliable sources' which is ridiculous and defeats the entire point of an encyclopedia that claims the "sum of all human knowledge" as a goal. While in abstract it sounds like a good idea, and in fact is if done correctly, the issue lies with how sources are deemed to be reliable or not; it's easily manipulated by groups/demographics that dislike a source or, in this case, an article. OmegaAOL obviously understands how to manipulate this process:

1. Feign objectivity while referencing various guidelines, such as notability, with zero interest in whether the article itself is indeed notable/relevant.
   This is almost always done by tossing accusations at sources with no real desire to improve the article, but rather to 'overwrite' existing sources with those that say something else or entirely get rid of the article, as in this case.
2. That failing, bring up other guidelines such as canvassing. It's worth noting that the closing admin didn't even agree with the canvassing statement; in fact, he didn't reply to it at all nor investigate, instead simply saying the keeps were "possibly" canvassed. The canvassing guidelines don't disallow requesting others to look for sources.
3. Now that the article's deleted and/or the sources rendered nil, rewrite associated content. OmegaAOL essentially chased away others through his accusations of canvassing so he could rewrite several parts of the Pale Moon article with little pushback, which I'll detail below, after successfully deleting the Goanna article. This may alternatively have been due to him attempting to take control after having his ego damaged, as hinted at by his post similar to gravedancing on Moonchild's talk page.

It's pretty much the age-old trick where somebody acts nice, certain, yet with a touch of cluelessness in order to get their way. Nice to get in the door, certain to convince others of their point, and clueless to mask their actual intent.

After getting the article deleted, he pretty quickly began mass-editing the Pale Moon page after leaving a passive-aggressive comment on Moonchild's talk page (all the while referring to him by his real name, I guess as some strange attempt at control?). Here are a couple highlights of the very neutral things he added, both with exquisite sources:

• Adding a sentence stating many websites are inaccessible, using questionable sources to justify it. One is a personal blog, one only states that Google struggles on it, one doesn't even mention Pale Moon being "slow", and the final one is from 2018. Curious how he takes issue with other sources' accuracy/notability yet not these!
• Rewriting the MyPal section, itself based on a non-reliable source by Wikipedia's standards, to blame Pale Moon's developers. Curious how he took issue with the Goanna sources but not this one!

I don't really think there's any point in caring about Wikipedia past public image at this point. It's overrun by people like this who use the rules and their manipulation of them to forge the site in their image. This is a pretty egregrious example, what with his passive-aggressiveness (example one, two, and the now-deleted comment on Moonchild's talk page), but it's far more common than you'd think. There's a joke on Wikipedia that there's a cabal; in reality, it's not far from the truth. The cabal is just a disorganized bunch of people who know how to use the guidelines to get what they want. Few on there have actual interest in the aforementioned goal of accruing the sum of all human knowledge.

[andyprough]

I don't really think there's any point in caring about Wikipedia past public image at this point. It's overrun by people like this who use the rules and their manipulation of them to forge the site in their image.

I don't personally really care at all about Wikipedia, have hardly ever used it myself and I agree with Moonchild in that I think it is being rapidly replaced by AI summaries at the top of every search page, to the point that Wikipedia may soon lose whatever relevance it once had.

However, you do seem knowledgeable in this area. Is there a way to bring up a complaint about this samomega person somewhere within the Byzantine Wikipedia rules where there could be a real investigation with real teeth? If not, then it's not worth bothering with more than likely.