[WikiEN-l] request to Jimbo for out-of-process deletion of image

[Katefan0]

I think this is similar to what happens sometimes at pedophilia-related
articles.  For the most part, we as Wikipedians are drawn to edit articles
in which we have a personal interest or stake.  Naturally, then, those who
disagree with age of consent laws will be drawn to articles such as
[[NAMBLA]].  Not only do most other Wikipedians not feel drawn there, they
in fact would rather purposefully avoid them because they make them feel
icky.  (I can certainly attest to that personally.)  But in that manner, I
have found that sometimes the "consensus" on these types of articles gets
skewed.  And this makes issues raised on the talk page very difficult to
resolve.

k

On 4/5/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Steve, and I want to make super clear that I think people can in
> good faith have quite varied opinions on different matters.
>
> What I wanted to point out is that we need to be especially vigilent
> when we have an area where we know there are POV pushers and trolls who
> are active.  As Erik pointed out, in a lot of cases like this, a tiny
> turnout at IfD will mean that community consensus is not well reflected,
> because the POV pushers will show up in force to override the small
> number of good editors who come by.
>
> Imagine this case:
> 100 good editors, 80 voting delete, 20 voting in good faith to keep
> 4 pov pushers
> 4 trolls
>
> End result: 80 - 28, consensus to delete
>
> versus
>
> 10 good editors, 8 voting delete, 2 voting in good faith to keep
> 4 pov pushers
> 4 trolls
>
> End result: 8 - 10, no conclusion, image kept
>
>
>
>
>
> Steve Block wrote:
> > Steve Bennett wrote:
> >> On 4/4/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> >>> I think the best way to understand 'what justification' is to
> understand
> >>> a certain sort of POV pushing... one of the goals of pedophiles is to
> >>> make the case that such materials are perfectly normal and healthy and
> >>> should be viewed as being completely routine.  One way to achieve that
> >>> goal is to be sure that such materials are published widely.
> >> Hi Jimbo,
> >>   A couple of people have taken exception to your references to
> >> paedophiles in this debate, and I'd like to join them. Is there any
> >> evidence that actual paedophiles were arguing for the inclusion of
> >> that image? Or is it just, as you acknowledge, anti-censorship people
> >> getting caught up in the argument and crossing the bounds of good
> >> taste?
> >>
> >> Conflating anti-censorship, anti-prude, anti-common sense, or simply
> >> trollish people with paedophiles is unfair at best, and inflammatory
> >> and offensive at worst, isn't it?
> >
> > Look, I for one initially argued keep at IFD, and I don't feel insulted
> > so much as embarrassed that I allowed myself to be blind-sided in such a
> > way, and I think Jimbo's spot on in what he says, and I'm a bit
> > disturbed that a lot of people who weren't involved in this are knocking
> > Jimbo on this point, superficially on my behalf.  I don't want people to
> > knock Jimbo on my behalf, I think Sam made the right call, so did Jimbo
> > and I think anyone who can't see that is either as blind sided as I was
> > or just looking for another big stick to hit Jimbo with.
> >
> > I'd like to apologise once again for getting the wrong end of the stick
> > on this issue, and I would like to see people extend the good faith that
> > everyone involved has extended me by not calling me a complete plonker,
> > which would be well deserved, and extend that good faith to Jimbo, who
> > has already qualified his statement once.  Jimbo's thrust, as I read it,
> > was that we shouldn't allow the gaming of the system by those who wish
> > to promote pedophilia, and that those of us for whom censorship and fair
> > use is a hot button topic should be aware that we can be manipulated,
> > and remember the goal is building an encyclopedia, not fighting
> > censorship or justifying the inclusion of any particular image.
> >
> > People who's hot button is mistrusting authority should also remember
> > the goal is building an encyclopedia, not fighting censorship or
> > justifying the inclusion of any particular image.
> >
> >
> > I'm sorry if people feel my words are too strong, but there it is.  I
> > was made to look a fool, and no-one likes that.  But I'm not too proud
> > to admit it and I don't see why I should be walking away scott free when
> > Jimbo is getting a hard time.
> >
> > Now, can I take this hair shirt off, it damn well itches.
> >
> > Steve Block
> >
> > Steve Block
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> #######################################################################
> #    Office: 1-727-231-0101       |  Free Culture and  Free Knowledge #
> #    http://www.wikipedia.org     |     Building a free world         #
> #######################################################################
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
>