David Gerard wrote:
For those wondering, this is the site in question:
http://lunasantin.blogspot.com/
And these are the relevant history entry comments from Luna Santin's
user page:
08:48 - Gurch: "remove link to attack site"
08:54 - Hoary: "reinstating link to a mild blog that shows no sign
of being an 'attack site'"
11:24 - Gurch: "It disusses Wikipedia contributors off-site, that's
good enough for WP:BADSITES
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:BADSITES>. Yes I know that was
rejected, but if people can fail RfA for not enforcing it, clearly
it's de facto policy"
11:54 - Lucasbfr: "rv, seriously... I don't see how Luna's blog is a
'website set up for the purpose of or substantially devoted to
harassing WP's volunteers' (from the recent RFAr). You should
discuss it with Luna"
11:59 - Gurch: "revert"
12:37 - Daniel: "Rubbish, Luna is afforded latitude as an
established contributor, and this falls within bounds that consensus
currently dictates."
13:23 - Gurch: "(latitude as an established contributor? so Kelly
Martin is not an established contributor? how about Gracenotes?"
13:26 - Daniel: "What?"
William
--
William Pietri <william(a)scissor.com>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:William_Pietri