Ray Saintonge wrote:
When you add these yourself your permission to include the material is implicit.
I'm talking about *information* I had provided (both on- and off-site), not content. Most of the pages I had provided that information on have been removed.
If you are indeed involved in the kind of activities that you describe, your personal involvement in Wikipedia is irrelevant to including this information. What becomes important is whether the activities were reliably reported elsewhere. Since many would consider that mentioning one's involvement with such activities as derogatory, the sourcing of such information is particularly important.
That's the point. I'm not involved with such activities. If I were, I wouldn't call it a "virulent personal attack".
It is presumptuous and arrogant to judge the behaviour of participants on other sites. It is also contrary to the spirit of NPOV to impose that principle on other sites. Of course other sites will engage in libel or copyright infringement, or other activity that may be illegal. Assuming good faith should include assuming that what is put on these other sites is perfectly legal. If there is something illegal there it is up to those affected to demand that they clean up their site. When they do that our links will then be to cleaned up sites or dead.
Ec
Well, at least we agree on this. It shouldn't be up to Wikipedia to determine the legality of external sites, nor should they judge the content except for in the sense "is it notable, and relevant to this article/discussion"?
Wikipedia Review isn't particularly notable, at least not yet, and thus, links to it can effectively be excluded from the article namespace (although I still hold that a single link from [[Criticism of Wikipedia]] would be appropriate.) Links from the Wikipedia: and Talk: namespaces might still be appropriate in select cases, which should be judged on a case-by-case basis, not banned on a global scale.
I'm just using WR as an example, as that appears to be more or less the site which prompted this debate.