On 7/2/07, Slim Virgin <slimvirgin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/2/07, James Farrar <james.farrar(a)gmail.com>
On 02/07/07, jayjg <jayjg99(a)gmail.com>
Yes, it was appropriate. The MONGO case was quite
clear when we voted
on it, and the vote was unanimous:
"A website that engages in the practice of publishing private
information concerning the identities of Wikipedia participants will
be regarded as an attack site whose pages should not be linked to from
Wikipedia pages under any circumstances."
OK, so we not cannot link to the New York Times, after its recent
I wish people would stop these hyperbolic slippery slopes. The NYT has
not "outed" any Wikipedia editor.
What about Essjay?
The only sites that shouldn't be
linked to are those that make a *habit* of outing people, and the only
people who are warned they might be blocked (or who are blocked) are
the ones doing it deliberately and disruptively, as in "Oh, is THIS
one of the naughty ones?" And "Ooooh, what about this? Aren't I
And by "people", you mean, you?