Elisabeth Bauer schrieb:
Brad Patrick wrote:
> Dear Community:
>
> The volume of corporate vanity/vandalism which is showing up on
> Wikipedia is overwhelming. At the office, we are receiving dozens of
> phone calls *per week* about company, organization, and marketing
> edits which are reverted, causing the non-notable, but
> self-aggrandizing authors, to scream bloody murder. This is as it
> should be. However, I am issuing a call to arms to the community to
> act in a much more draconian fashion in response to corporate
> self-editing and vanity page creation. This is simply out of hand,
> and we need your help.
>
> We are the #14 website in the world. We are a big target. If we are
> to remain true to our encyclopedic mission, this kind of nonsense
> cannot be tolerated. This means the administrators and new page
> patrol need to be clear when they see new usernames and page creation
> which are blatantly commercial - shoot on sight. There should be no
> question that someone who claims to have a "famous movie studio" and
> has exactly 2 Google hits - both their Myspace page - they get nuked.
> Ban users who promulgate such garbage for a significant period of
> time. They need to be encouraged to avoid the temptation to recreate
> their article, thereby raising the level of damage and wasted time
> they incur.
>
> Some of you might think regular policy and VfD is the way to go. I am
> here to tell you it is not enough. We are losing the battle for
> encyclopedic content in favor of people intent on hijacking Wikipedia
> for their own memes. This scourge is a serious waste of time and
> energy. We must put a stop to this now.
>
Tjo endlich sagts mal jemand.
Mag sein dass wir es nicht so schlimm haben; warum greift man nicht
einfach mal durch
gegen Trottel. Mir persönlich geht's dabei auch um Langzeitstörenfriede.
Die man einfach mal
sperren sollte ohne ewige Diskussion.
-- Leon.