On 9/9/2014 7:51 PM, LB wrote:
You are braver than I! On the other hand this is what [[User:Jayen466|Andreas]] wrote when I complained the woman editor was being harassed off line:I'm going to keep at it, for now. Honestly, I'm tired of it being a mostly internally discussed problem... Perhaps I'll change my mind at some point, but that's my thinking on it at this time.
Lightbreather
Criticising the quality of an editor's work, whether here or elsewhere, is not harassment. This is not a private project, but a public one, with a significant impact on public life. Any such public project should be prepared to be criticised. If someone writes nonsense in a science article read and relied on by a million people a year, that is a matter of public interest, just like stories like [http://twkozlowski.net/the-pot-and-the-kettle-the-wikimedia-way/ this], [http://twkozlowski.net/paid-editing-thrives-in-the-heart-of-wikipedia/ this], [http://www.salon.com/2013/05/17/revenge_ego_and_the_corruption_of_wikipedia/ this], [http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/is-the-pr-industry-buying-influence-over-wikipedia this] or [http://www.dailydot.com/politics/croatian-wikipedia-fascist-takeover-controversy-right-wing/ this]. If you would like to curtail editors' freedom to speak out about Wikipedia's failings in public, this in itself will be a media story, and rightly so. Such ideas belong to places like Azerbaijan and North Korea.
Thus one would think quoting nasty sexist things, especially when an editor's name not mentioned should be ok. This really was a test case, wasn't it? (Or not in a community that still applies double standards to male vs. female actions.)
Here's the link to the ANI in question:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive835#Harassment