[WikiEN-l] Re: Arbitration Committee members granted checkuser tool

[El C]

 -------------------------------------
Paid adminship: a non issue
-------------------------------------
Correct, no interest whatsoever (may I speak for everyone?) in the
impractical, backwards idea of a corporate-types, *Right*eous (so-called
non-political) payed admins, bureaucrats and arbitrators idea.
 > *I wasn't talking about people doing what they believe, I was talking
about refusing to consider taking on paid employee's > due to philosophical
or political predispositions. Its rather a non-issue however, since their
doesn't seem to be any interest in the idea. *

 > *Jack (Sam Spade)*
 --------------------------------------------
Trustworthy appeal: higher power
-------------------------------------------
To a higher power: Jimbo's wife (or possibly even the Wikipedia community)!

> > *To Who? *
> >* Jack (Sam Spade) *

>* Jimbo wouldn't have appointed them to the arbcom if he didn't
believe*>* them to be trustworthy. If you believe he was mistaken, dig
up the*>* evidence and appeal his decision.*>**>* --Mgm*

-----------------------------------------------------------
Cite sources? Yes, we can help you with that:
-----------------------------------------------------------
Same in my uni and any uni. I'd also grade lower those students who cite
Wikipedia as I have in the past for other unreliable internet sources (if
they use diffs, though, they'd get bonus marks).
  But of course, students gain insights from Wikipedia articles all the time
without needing to cite them directly, especially when those articles are
carefuly sourced thereby easily leading to more in-depth works, while at the
same time, providing a basic, encyclopedic orientation with the given
material.
  The point is that knowledge (free or otherwise) is far from limited to
manifesting itself in such a linear, rigid way. Good students (not to
mention researchers) are able to adopt creative research methods without
losing their focus, opportunities which Wikipedia offers in abundance.
 As for the "professional" or mildly offensive amateur/wannabe academics,
they also are deep within our midst. As of course are the violently
offensive commies. Now that's a lot of food for thought!

El_C

>* > The academics at my uni think the wikipedia is mildly offensive,
in*>* > the sense that they enjoy being paid to write*>* >
books/journals/whathaveyou, and don't enjoy seeing amateurs giving
it*>* > away for free. Because of this, and our noticable failings,
students*>* > are penalised if they attempt to cite the wikipedia as a
source at my*>* > uni.*>* >*>* > I just now returned from an 8 hour
seminar wherein we were repeatedly*>* > informed that free,
non-governmental information on the internet is*>* > dubious at best,
and should be avoided for anything other than*>* > commercial or
general knowledge queries. Instead, the online*>* > university 
database was praised (it includes a subscription to*>* > britannica,
btw ;)*>* >*>* > Jack (Sam Spade)*

>* Well, I'd've gotten penalized for citing Wikipedia too, but I'd
also*>* have gotten penalized for citing Britannica. However, various
features*>* of Wikipedia made it much better as a quick study aid than
the more*>* academically respectable references, and no one was ever
the wiser.*>* And it is good as a study aid -- but most university
students I know*>* *need* to be cautioned that not everything they
read on the internet*>* that looks legit is true. (I love Wikipedia,
and I am an optimist,*>* but, well...)*>**>* -Kat*>*
[[User:Mindspillage]]*>* wannabe academic*>**>* --*>* "There was a
point to this story, but it has temporarily*>* escaped the
chronicler's mind."  --Douglas Adams*