I remember reading somewhere on Wikipedia: that it'd be really nice for
publicity if we could have a research paper about Wikipedia published in
a peer-reviewed academic journal. I'm currently a history undegraduate
at the University of Texas - Austin and would like to "spam" some of our
school's professors about this. Is there an existing pre-formed letter
for this purpose or should I author my own? Have there been other
attempts to solicit academic research by other Wikipedians? To what
degree of success?
Kent Wang
I fired this shot across JackLynch's bow:
----
Jack,
If you can make Tannin so angry that he swears at you, I can't think of
anything but the probability that you are provoking him on purpose.
Maybe to test the new Mediation/Arbitration system? If not, my
apologies, but that's how it looks to me.
So, please try harder to be nice! :-)
----
Given the timing of his appearance, and the issues he focuses on, I
think it's more likely he's a sock puppet than a newbie.
Advice?
Ed Poor
One of many Wikipedia admins
Grandpa was celebrating his 100th birthday and everybody complimented
him on how athletic and well-preserved he appeared. "Gentlemen, I will
tell you the secret of my success," he cackled. "I have been in the open
air day after day for some 75 years now."
The celebrants were impressed and asked how he managed to keep up his
rigorous fitness regime. "Well, you see my wife and I were married 75
years ago. On our wedding night, we made a solemn pledge. Whenever we
had a fight, the one who was proved wrong would go outside and take a
walk."
No, Ed. Sadly, no mediation is taking place at all on the
"Palestinian views of the peace process" article.
Martin has still refused to mediate, despite his public
promises to do so; instead, on the article's Talk page he
has bizarrely stated that he has a secret agenda, and he
refuses to explain this to any moderator or to me. Then,
still refusing to discuss the issue, he set up a Wikipedia
webpage webpage designed to harass the very person he had
promised to work with. That is is a total violation of
trust and Wikietiquette. If other people adopted this
tactic, Wikipedia would soon fall apart.
I asked LittleDan to be a mediation, but he has done
nothing on the topic, except bug me about allowing Nazis to
put their views into Wikipedia. This is no joke; he
repeatedly has written that we should allow Nazis to
include their views. Frankly, I have no idea why he is
writing about this, or what this has to do with the
article.
Jimbo, what do we do in such bizarre cases? The person I
asked for mediation with has refused to mediate, and one of
the chosen mediators hasn't said one word on the topic we
are supposed to be discussing!
Robert
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/
Some time ago this list decided that it was totally
inapproproate to create Wikipedia webpages criticising
Wikipedia contributors.
The purpose of Wikipedia is to create an open-course
encyclopedia. Disputes are to be brought to the attention
of this list, or to the designated mediators.
However, Martin (MyRedDice) is starting again the same
process that led to EntmootsOfTrolls being banned, namely
the setting up of webpages designed to harss a Wikipedia
user. Unless policy has been changed, this action is
forbidden.
If you allow Martin to do this, there will be no end to
number of hateful webpages that will sprout up on
Wikipedia, whenever people disagree.
We can solve things through mediation, like I have been
trying to advocate, or we can use outright censorship (by
wiping out articles like Martin keeps doing) and creating
harassment-pages (like Martin is doing and EntmootOfTrolls
kept doing). I cannot understand why the former option is
not preferable.
Robert (RK)
=====
"No one is poor except he who lacks knowledge....A person who has knowledge has everything. A person who lacks knowledge, what has he? Once a person acquires knowledge, what does he lack? [Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim, 41a]
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/
If you want some comic relief from quarrels and trolls and edit wars and
"conflicts between users", etc., ad nauseum....
Try reading Angela's "The Wrong Version" on meta.
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wrong_Version
I busted a gut and had to be rushed to St. Luke's for stitches ;-)
Uncle Ed
Ed's idea sounds like a runner to me. The truth may not set you free, but at
least you know who chained you up.
Billy
DISCLAIMER: This message has been scanned by Norton Antivirus (using the
latest definitions) for all known Viruses.
The information in this message is confidential and is intended solely for
the use of the named addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you
must not copy, distribute or use this email or the information contained in
it for any purpose other than to notify us. If you have received this
message in error, please notify the sender immediately, and delete this
email from your system. Thank you.
Chris Purcell at Meatball Wiki addresses the same
question as Theresa's.
<< You might need a trust metric to stop relatively
untrustworthy users, who have simply kept well-behaved
until then, retroactively reverting all a respectable
user's posts and thus zeroing his trust. >>
http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?action=browse&diff=1&id=TrollDetecti
onFormula
Ed Poor