Robert wrote:
Mav wrote:
Blah, blah, blah Robert. You cry wolf so often that I just delete your messages without ever reading them anymore. I'm sure many other people do the same.
Your taunting is out of place, Mav. Please refrain from using this list in that way; this list is only for discussion of Wikipedia policy.
Further, Wikipedia users should be aware that Mav's claims are incorrect. Just check the edit history of the article I named.
[[Palestinian views of the peace process ]]
Its not a matter of opinion whether or not Anthere did such editing and protection; the only opinion can be on if this was wise.
Danny writes:
As of today, Anthere has quite a bit more authority than you care to imagine. Pick your enemies wisely, Robert. I wouldn't go launching attacks on the Board if I were you.
Danny, from where I stand, those with the most power are the ones who are most obligated to be careful in using this power, and in making sure that Wikipedia rules are followed in a fair manner. In fact, that is what others on this list hae always said as well. Your letter basically implies that we must do what the new powers that be say, "or else". Even Anthere isn't saying this. Maybe I was a bit hot in how I expressed my disagreement with her actions, but I was very specific about what I considered wrong, and why.
I offered several paragraphs stating what my points were (even if these paragraphs were written by a better writer than myself.) People had the opportunity to read them, and consider them on their merits. That's what this list is for
- when we think an issue isn't about an article, but about
Wikipeida policy itself. I see no reason to refrain from doing this.
Ironically, only Anthere has actually responded to the points in my letter to this list. And she has replied in a modest and impartial way which gives me much hope. She focused on the content and on the issues I raised, a lesson for all of us. However, others have made polemical statements or personal remarks. Thus:
(A) It looks like mediation can be made on this article, between Anthere, Mav, Danny, myself, and others. (B) But it depresses me that many people here refuse to focus on the specific issues, and focus instead on personal issues.
This is not what I expected at all, but it's interesting.
RK (Robert)
Hello Robert
I thank you for these positive thoughts and for the invitation to discuss the article with all the other editors concerned and interested in the topic :-)
But I must respectfully refuse the invitation, as, I already said, I have little knowledge on these matters, so would be more a burden than help. I will however think of reading this article from time to time, to learn a bit more the various perspectives, as you are all working to improve it together.