WikiEN-l July 2007

wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org

155 participants
211 discussions

Re: [WikiEN-l] curious advertising tie-in
by Daniel R. Tobias 03 Jul '07

03 Jul '07

On 2 Jul 2007 at 18:39:16 -0400, Steve Summit <scs(a)eskimo.com> wrote: > In 1969, Yaskawa created the term "Mechatronics" > to encompass electronics, mechanics, and control. > The philosophy of Mechatronics has grown in popularity > ever since. We haven't had that spirit here since 1969. > For more information on Mechatronics, visit the Wikipedia > Web site. That's rather brave / foolhardy of them to rely on Wikipedia to make an advertising point, given that everything there is subject to constant change. By the time the ad comes out, or immediately afterward, the article they reference could get deleted, renamed, or rewritten in a way less flattering to their company. I see it presently starts with a box saying that the article is "inadequately sourced", which probably isn't what their marketing types would prefer readers of their ads be confronted with right up front. I've seen occasional TV/radio ads telling listeners to "Google" some product name (also a foolhardy move given that the top Google result could easily turn out to be a critic's site), but this is the first one I've seen for Wikipedia. One can say that such techniques show the company has confidence in their products if they think that sending people to objective information sources will result in their being favorably impressed without having to bombard them with marketing propaganda. -- == Dan == Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/ Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/ Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/

1 0

Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onatt ttackkkkkkkkkkk site link policy
by Fred Bauder 03 Jul '07

03 Jul '07

>-----Original Message----- >From: Charlotte Webb [mailto:charlottethewebb@gmail.com] >Sent: Tuesday, July 3, 2007 01:19 AM >To: 'English Wikipedia' >Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattackkkkkkkkkkk site link policy > >On 7/3/07, Fred Bauder <fredbaud(a)waterwiki.info> wrote: >> I'll never accept linking to personal attacks on Wikipedians. > >There definitely needs to be a line drawn between attacking and outing them: > >One site might say "User:X is an incompetent admin who pushes a >[ideology]ist agenda and is part of a cabal with User:Y and User:Z. >The three of them are a disgrace to Wikipedia". That's definitely an >attack, but it's sticks and stones. > >Another site might say "User:X on Wikipedia is [full name] from >[location] who used to work for [company] and is a disgrace to >[real-life occupuation]". That's also an attack, but it's serious >business, particularly if User:X had desired to remain >anon/pseudon-ymous. That is a constant temptation to irresponsible critics. When the home phone calls and calls to their employer start, some folks get profoundly upset and we lose them. This method of attack is quite effective. And a site that encourages it is trying to do damage or doesn't give a damn. And then there are actual stalkers that any reasonable person has reason to fear. Fred

1 0

Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattackkkkkkkkk site link policy
by Fred Bauder 03 Jul '07

03 Jul '07

>-----Original Message----- >From: Ray Saintonge [mailto:saintonge@telus.net] >Sent: Monday, July 2, 2007 11:58 PM >To: 'English Wikipedia' >Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattackkkkkkk site link policy > >Fred Bauder wrote: > >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: jayjg [mailto:jayjg99@gmail.com] >>> >>> >>>>The only link ban I push is the one remedy in MONGO which applies only to ED. I would discourage attempts to broaden that to most other critical sites. >>>> >>>>Fred >>>> >>>> >>>Perhaps you forget these statements Fred: >>> >>>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbit… >>>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Attack_sites&diff=… >>> >>>There's no need to apologize for them either, as you were right. >>> >>> >>I'll certainly stand by this: >> >>"Links to aggressive attacks on Wikipedia users may be removed. No oneneeds permission, no one needs to spend time making a policy about it,or arguing about it." >> >There's a difference between an attack and an attack site. An attack >site can still have other pages that are fairly normal. > >Ec That is certainly true of Wikipedia Review. Occasionally there is a more or less constructive or at least critical conversation. Fred

1 0

Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattackkkkkkkkk site link policy
by Fred Bauder 03 Jul '07

03 Jul '07

>-----Original Message----- >From: James Farrar [mailto:james.farrar@gmail.com] >Sent: Monday, July 2, 2007 11:26 PM >To: 'English Wikipedia' >Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattackkkkkkk site link policy > >On 03/07/07, Fred Bauder <fredbaud(a)waterwiki.info> wrote: > >> I'll certainly stand by this: >> >> "Links to aggressive attacks on Wikipedia users may be removed. No oneneeds permission, no one needs to spend time making a policy about it,or arguing about it." > >It's a long way from that to "sites that contain attacks on Wikipedia >users must not be linked to at all - not even parts of the site that >do not contain such attacks". In the case of ED no, they are dedicated to snarky attacks. Sites like WR, full of people we have banned, according to them, very unfairly, can also be quite nasty, but contain from time to time criticism we ought to consider, wrong headed as it might be. Fred

1 0

Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattack site link policy
by The Mangoe 02 Jul '07

02 Jul '07

On 7/2/07, Fred Bauder <fredbaud(a)waterwiki.info> wrote: > I did originate it though and am not intimidated. I shudder to contemplate what > Mr. Goodman wants for Wikipedia. If a pack of dogs fall on someone after he and > his ilk are in control, I guess we will simply be obligated to stand by and do > nothing. The central problem in all of this is the hyperbole. At worst the WR-ites are a bunch of malcontents whose not always coherent ravings can be ignored by choosing not to visit their site. As a "pack of dogs", they rank right up there in threat with a litter of Pekinese pups.

2 1

Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattackkkkkkk site link policy
by Fred Bauder 02 Jul '07

02 Jul '07

>-----Original Message----- >From: jayjg [mailto:jayjg99@gmail.com] >Sent: Monday, July 2, 2007 08:32 PM >To: 'English Wikipedia' >Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattackkkkk site link policy >> The only link ban I push is the one remedy in MONGO which applies only to ED. I would discourage attempts to broaden that to most other critical sites. >> >> Fred > >Perhaps you forget these statements Fred: > >http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbit… >http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Attack_sites&diff=… > >There's no need to apologize for them either, as you were right. > >Jay. I'll certainly stand by this: "Links to aggressive attacks on Wikipedia users may be removed. No oneneeds permission, no one needs to spend time making a policy about it,or arguing about it." Fred

4 3

Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattackkk site link policy
by Fred Bauder 02 Jul '07

02 Jul '07

>-----Original Message----- >From: Steve Summit [mailto:scs@eskimo.com] >Sent: Monday, July 2, 2007 07:35 PM >To: wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org >Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattack site link policy > >JzG wrote: >> Fact is, WR was never a reliable source... The reason we should not >> link to it is not the attacks or the outing, it's because no collection >> of banned trolls and frustrated vanity spammers will ever have anything >> like a neutral commentary on anything... > >Great. So we can disallow links to them from article space under RS. >We don't need a special, blanket ban. Yeh, what are any of them a reference for? Fred

1 0

curious advertising tie-in
by Steve Summit 02 Jul '07

02 Jul '07

Spotted this full-page ad on p. 2 of the June 2007 issue of Design World magazine: WIKIPEDIA: MECHATRONICS [picture of rock band stage with instrumentation control components as musical instruments] Yaskawa set the stage in 1969... and you thought Woodstock was groovy! In 1969, Yaskawa created the term "Mechatronics" to encompass electronics, mechanics, and control. The philosophy of Mechatronics has grown in popularity ever since. For almost 40 years, the Mechatronics culture of Yaskawa... [more copy removed] For more information on Mechatronics, visit the Wikipedia Web site. 1-800-YASKAWA � www.yaskawa.com Servomotors � Motion controllers � AC inverter drives � Robotics YASKAWA The Drive for Quality (tm) This is sorta flattering on one level, but worrisome on a couple of others...

5 5

Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattackkkkk site link policy
by Fred Bauder 02 Jul '07

02 Jul '07

>-----Original Message----- >From: Daniel R. Tobias [mailto:dan@tobias.name] >Sent: Monday, July 2, 2007 04:25 PM >To: wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org >Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattackkk site link policy > >On 2 Jul 2007 at 13:07:46 +0000, "Fred Bauder" ><fredbaud(a)waterwiki.info> wrote: > >> I did originate it though and am not intimidated. I shudder to >> contemplate what Mr. Goodman wants for Wikipedia. If a pack of >> dogs fall on someone after he and his ilk are in control, I guess >> we will simply be obligated to stand by and do nothing. > >The "pack of dogs" I see is the clique that's pushing the link ban, >and ganging up on anybody who doesn't go along with it (such as, for >instance, torpedoing their RfA nominations). You're one of the big >dogs in that pack. It's precisely because I believe in standing up >to bullies that I'm opposing you on this. But what exactly are you opposing? The original decision made in MONGO which applies to the one drama site, or the attempts to make a general policy out of the principles expressed? The only link ban I push is the one remedy in MONGO which applies only to ED. I would discourage attempts to broaden that to most other critical sites. Fred

2 1

Re: [WikiEN-l] Fred Bauder"clarifies"on attack site link policy
by Daniel R. Tobias 02 Jul '07

02 Jul '07

On 2 Jul 2007 at 09:08:56 -0400, "The Cunctator" <cunctator(a)gmail.com> wrote: > THOUGHTCRIME! THOUGHTCRIME! The proper Newspeak word is "crimethink". Report immediately to the re-education camps for your egregious misuse of the language. -- == Dan == Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/ Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/ Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/

3 2

← Newer
1
...
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

WikiEN-l July 2007