Michael Noda wrote:
I would like to second all of what Andrew has said
Thirded. I've been working on Wikipedia since mid 2001, I've been
subscribed to this list for a couple of years now too, and I neither
know nor really care all that much about all these details. What I _do_
care about is the atmosphere that's being generated by it, both here
on-wiki and in the general external public perception of what we do
here. It's all just a tempest in a teapot in the grand scheme of things
but it's a loud and annoying tempest that gets attention.
I'm not going to go so far as to ask anyone to leave, but it would be
really nice if everyone ratcheted down the drama a bit. If someone asks
"hey, this link  says you're a secret agent who blew up Locherbie,
what's with that?" Just give a plain answer explaining how the article's
written by a loonie with an axe to grind. Dollars to donuts most people
will go "oh, okay" and move on. Using all this mysterious "Oversight"
and "Attack Sites" stuff to wipe the question from existence only makes