On 5/30/07, jayjg jayjg99@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, that's one of the two cases I've seen so far that might qualify, someone who is running for a Wikipedia "office" and is also posting to WR (or accused of it). The other would be the unlikely event that WR was notable enough to actually warrant a Wikipedia article.
And your answers to the specific points I raised, please? The evasiveness to answer and defend your stance is problematic.
If you stand by your convictions and can back them up, it shouldn't be a problem, of course. Also, this doesn't appear to be about Wikipedia Review at all, but a whole new implementation of policy that empowers anyone to scream fire and get things they don't like arbitrarily removed from Wikipedia.
Regards, Joe http://www.joeszilagyi.com