No, the litmus test should be "does this link
benefit Wikipedia in any
way".. And the answer, as it turns out, is "almost never".
This is equally fair. Indeed, it's really a different wording of the
same concept. If the link benefits Wikipedia in any way, it's pretty
likely that removing it will stir up drama. And vice verse,
They always were rare.
Well, I have to grant that this is fairly legitimate. Despite my best
efforts when I was an admin on that forum, it was next to impossible to
keep a lid on things, and things have only gone downhill since.
Nonetheless, there are a number of occasions where there are reasoned
discussions that don't involve personal attacks
Aside from providing the venue for it and cheering on
Harassment and stalking, no. That isn't cheered on in the slightest, and
users who have been found to have engaged in it have been removed from
the forum in the past. As for "defamation", I don't think that's really
a valid concern regarding Wikipedia Review. There have been some nasty
personal attacks, but nothing defamatory. Of course, other sites *do*
engage in this practice.