On 7/2/07, jayjg jayjg99@gmail.com wrote:
Look, let's start talking some sense now. ED, WR are attack sites, nothing more. They have no value whatsoever, and, unless under some extraordinarily unlikely circumstances, there's simply no reason to link to them. The MONGO case was clear (and correct) about this.
And I say you are wrong, and that you are lumping together a bunch of sites whose one real commonality is that they bear ill-will towards a variety of Wikipedians. I'm not going to defend ED and Wikitruth, but as there is an article on the latter it is ordinarily reasonable to link to it, and pointless not to. WR is just a forum. As far as the "attack" nature of it is concerned, it is so not because they give names to people (if you can find them, and I'd bet most people would have a lot of trouble doing so) but because of their opposition to the way Wikipedia is being run.
But even then, the problem is that you can't keep it confined to that small set of sites, because naming names is just something that people out there are going to do. Now, maybe some oldtimers are supposed to know that "attack sites" really means "ED, WR, and Wikitruth" and that other sites which name names are supposed to be left alone. It's simply not reasonable to expect to people to know this, and therefore the various erasure incidents are going to keep happening. So it has turned into yet another source of vandalism that people have to patrol for.