You're mistaking what I said. I did not say that subjects can edit their own wiki biographies with impunity and force. What I said is that subjects speaking about themselves have a wide latitude. If the New Bedford Post (newspaper) reports that "Britney Spears was born on Mars" and Britney in her personal blog reports that "I was not!", we can report both, and equally, even though Britney is speaking in-the-first-person.
A subject's own statements, about themselves, can always be reported in their own biography. I'm not saying that they would edit those in. I'm saying that we can. Not that we should or must, only that we can.
Will Johnson
In a message dated 12/27/2008 8:58:41 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, wilhelm@nixeagle.org writes:
I thought the last time I checked subjects were asked to *not* edit their pages... And generally when they do... Someone shouts COI at them.
(I generally agree with subjects not dictating their pages but some of the users that deal with COI in the past were not always that nice to the subjects.... Anyway, I just wanted to point out that subjects don't get THAT much leeway. St leafy not as of 3 months ago.)
On 12/27/08, WJhonson@aol.com WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Link me the essay Derida wrote and I will summarize it. Then your problem will disappear and we won't have to hear any more about him :) (or her or it or goat).
By the way, you are aware Phil, that subject's speaking about themselves, in their own articles, have a wide latitude. Right?
Will Johnson
**************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolc...)
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
**************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolc...)
Ah ok will sorry about that... You are correct there.
This is a problem, however the solution needs to clearly deal only with the specified situation above... As not to make vesck theories any easier to get on wikipedia.
Perhaps a simple exemption to the NOR page to cover the described problem?
On 12/28/08, WJhonson@aol.com WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
You're mistaking what I said. I did not say that subjects can edit their own wiki biographies with impunity and force. What I said is that subjects speaking about themselves have a wide latitude. If the New Bedford Post (newspaper) reports that "Britney Spears was born on Mars" and Britney in her personal blog reports that "I was not!", we can report both, and equally, even though Britney is speaking in-the-first-person.
A subject's own statements, about themselves, can always be reported in their own biography. I'm not saying that they would edit those in. I'm saying that we can. Not that we should or must, only that we can.
Will Johnson
In a message dated 12/27/2008 8:58:41 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, wilhelm@nixeagle.org writes:
I thought the last time I checked subjects were asked to *not* edit their pages... And generally when they do... Someone shouts COI at them.
(I generally agree with subjects not dictating their pages but some of the users that deal with COI in the past were not always that nice to the subjects.... Anyway, I just wanted to point out that subjects don't get THAT much leeway. St leafy not as of 3 months ago.)
On 12/27/08, WJhonson@aol.com WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Link me the essay Derida wrote and I will summarize it. Then your problem will disappear and we won't have to hear any more about him :) (or her or it or goat).
By the way, you are aware Phil, that subject's speaking about themselves, in their own articles, have a wide latitude. Right?
Will Johnson
**************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolc...)
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
**************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolc...) _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Sorry about the double post... Vesck was supposed to be "crack" but my blackberry made it into some non word. Again sorry
On 12/28/08, Wilhelm Schnotz wilhelm@nixeagle.org wrote:
Ah ok will sorry about that... You are correct there.
This is a problem, however the solution needs to clearly deal only with the specified situation above... As not to make vesck theories any easier to get on wikipedia.
Perhaps a simple exemption to the NOR page to cover the described problem?
On 12/28/08, WJhonson@aol.com WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
You're mistaking what I said. I did not say that subjects can edit their own wiki biographies with impunity and force. What I said is that subjects speaking about themselves have a wide latitude. If the New Bedford Post (newspaper) reports that "Britney Spears was born on Mars" and Britney in her personal blog reports that "I was not!", we can report both, and equally, even though Britney is speaking in-the-first-person.
A subject's own statements, about themselves, can always be reported in their own biography. I'm not saying that they would edit those in. I'm saying that we can. Not that we should or must, only that we can.
Will Johnson
In a message dated 12/27/2008 8:58:41 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, wilhelm@nixeagle.org writes:
I thought the last time I checked subjects were asked to *not* edit their pages... And generally when they do... Someone shouts COI at them.
(I generally agree with subjects not dictating their pages but some of the users that deal with COI in the past were not always that nice to the subjects.... Anyway, I just wanted to point out that subjects don't get THAT much leeway. St leafy not as of 3 months ago.)
On 12/27/08, WJhonson@aol.com WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Link me the essay Derida wrote and I will summarize it. Then your problem will disappear and we won't have to hear any more about him :) (or her or it or goat).
By the way, you are aware Phil, that subject's speaking about themselves, in their own articles, have a wide latitude. Right?
Will Johnson
**************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolc...)
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
**************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolc...) _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Dec 28, 2008, at 12:51 AM, Wilhelm Schnotz wrote:
Perhaps a simple exemption to the NOR page to cover the described problem?
I suppose. Though truth be told, the described problem is going to be the vast majority of notable specialist topics - any time you have multiple sources on a specialist's work, the secondary sources commenting on the work get in under looser standards than the specialist's own defenses of his work. It's a NPOV problem. And those specialist topics are, presumably, what the "no specialist knowledge" clause is going to deal with. So the question becomes, if specialist topics are the exception to the "no specialist knowledge" clause, what exactly is that clause doing for us that is not already covered by other parts of policies?
-Phil