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.