haven't seen any low-status editors
making jokes about cabals. i wonder why.
how would you define "low status" Non-admins? I don't think heirarchy on
the
wiki is that concrete. I'm not an admin or "high status", and I find the
Cabal humor page uplifting. It defuses my urge to assume bad faith.
On Jan 30, 2008 2:41 PM, David Goodman <dgoodmanny(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I think any joke about a cabal is a disaster, and an
example of trying to
inappropriate defuse what is a serious concern. This is all the more true
when the people involved are important enough to be part of a real cabal
if
there were one. Come to think of it, I haven't seen any low-status editors
making jokes about cabals. i wonder why.
On Jan 30, 2008 3:13 PM, Steven Walling <steven.walling(a)gmail.com> wrote:
So, as far as you're concerned I can setup
some joke page entirely
unrelated to Wikipedia on Wikipedia. Redirect a domain name to it. Use
CSS hacks to overwrite the user interface. .. and keep it protected to
prevent unapproved people from modifying my website. Did I get that
right?
First off, I didn't know it was protected. That is inappropriate, and
makes
no sense.
But the Bathrobe Cabal isn't just a joke page. It's a humorous page that
is
a community building tool for admins and a resource for non-admins to
find
help from a friendly and knowledgeable set of
sysops, which is far
useful
than a lot of the off-topic userpage stuff that
gets let alone. I do not
understand that logic of attacking an obviously useful page just because
someone has bought and redirected an outside domain to it. It's more
than
just "no harm done". There is a
palpable benefit to the page.
On Jan 30, 2008 11:36 AM, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen(a)shaw.ca> wrote:
> Peter Ansell wrote:
> > If they leave because a userspace page, which was not promoting
> > collaboration on wikipedia articles, was deleted then they were *not
> > valuable* to the encyclopedia.
>
> That seems like an extremely petty criterion of "value." Have you
> checked the contributions lists of the Bathrobe Cabal members? If all
> they do is work on the Bathrobe Cabal page, sure, no big loss. But
> considering they have to run the gauntlet of RfA to join the Bathrobe
> Cabal that seems unlikely. Almost by definition they've had to
> contribute a lot of valuable work to Wikipedia to get there.
>
> > It could however be affected if others figure out that admins aren't
> > consistent and chuck a fuss because their Userspace pages were
deleted
for the same reason that page was kept in a shortened
discussion.
We could leave all harmless user subpages like this one alone,
admin-created or not. That would be a consistent approach.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
--
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l