On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Andrew Turvey wrote:
I think the only way of responding to these kind of
dilemmas is through office actions like this. Although Jimmy Wales was the main driver on
this, it was largely implemented by admins - independent volunteers like the rest of us
who no doubt would have kicked up a fuss if the case had been more problematic.
As to whether it was a "reliable source", I've no doubt it was in the
context - this was just the easiest excuse to hang the actions off.
It would have been much better if it was officially an office action. Instead,
ordinary Wikipedians were being put in the position of being told by people
with authority that the rules demanded something that they manifestly did
not. Yes, it was a reliable source, and they said it wasn't, and it's an
excuse. Think about what you are really saying when you're saying "it's an
excuse". We *trust* the people in charge of Wikipedia to enforce rules
fairly. This trust was broken. (And it was by no means the first time, it's
just that the cause was a little better this time.)