My reaction seems to be unique so far. I would think it much better for the Wikipedia project that we do not publicise that we know exactly who is doing this. It is fascinating to watch the congress staffers at work. It is just a pity that shortly they will smarten up and be doing this with proper accounts via different IPs.
If there have only been a thousand changes so far, most of which were positive, this does not seem to be a "major" problem. Certainly not compared to the information we're gleaning from this. So, by all means, let's continue to revert the particularly obnoxious changes, but asking them to "stop it" will simply make it invisible.
Steve
Steve Bennett wrote:
My reaction seems to be unique so far. I would think it much better for the Wikipedia project that we do not publicise that we know exactly who is doing this. It is fascinating to watch the congress staffers at work. It is just a pity that shortly they will smarten up and be doing this with proper accounts via different IPs.
If there have only been a thousand changes so far, most of which were positive, this does not seem to be a "major" problem. Certainly not compared to the information we're gleaning from this. So, by all means, let's continue to revert the particularly obnoxious changes, but asking them to "stop it" will simply make it invisible.
A little late for that since my phone is ringing off the hook with reporters interested in the story.
My reaction seems to be unique so far. I would think it much better for the Wikipedia project that we do not publicise that we know exactly who is doing this. It is fascinating to watch the congress staffers at work. It is just a pity that shortly they will smarten up and be doing this with proper accounts via different IPs.
If there have only been a thousand changes so far, most of which were positive, this does not seem to be a "major" problem. Certainly not compared to the information we're gleaning from this. So, by all means, let's continue to revert the particularly obnoxious changes, but asking them to "stop it" will simply make it invisible.
A little late for that since my phone is ringing off the hook with reporters interested in the story.
Any chance of, say, the chairs of the House and Senate Ethics Committees writing a response to our RfC? Or, even better, Speaker Hastert and Vice President Cheney?
Since the Foundation is a 503(c), I think this should be taken seriously. How much of a scandal would it be for Congressional staffers to interfere with, say, the work of Red Cross volunteers for crass political purposes? Wikipedia is Serious Business™.
On 30/01/06, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
If there have only been a thousand changes so far, most of which were positive, this does not seem to be a "major" problem. Certainly not compared to the information we're gleaning from this. So, by all means, let's continue to revert the particularly obnoxious changes, but asking them to "stop it" will simply make it invisible.
A little late for that since my phone is ringing off the hook with reporters interested in the story.
For what it's worth, and for a little international scope, at least two parliament.uk IP address - probably proxy servers from inside the Commons - have edited various articles, mostly those on individual MPs. Minor fact-checking and expanding bio-stubs, as far as I can see - the sort of thing anyone does on discovering their biography or that of their boss. Haven't spotted any vandalism yet, or anything quite as partisan as some of the US edits... but it's probably buried there somewhere.
Anyone who understands the web system at aph.gov.au or parl.gc.ca want to see if we can find an equivalent there?
-- - Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
Any "big" reporters?
On 1/30/06, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Steve Bennett wrote:
My reaction seems to be unique so far. I would think it much better for the Wikipedia project that we do not publicise that we know exactly who is doing this. It is fascinating to watch the congress staffers at work. It is just a pity that shortly they will smarten up and be doing this with proper accounts via different IPs.
If there have only been a thousand changes so far, most of which were positive, this does not seem to be a "major" problem. Certainly not compared to the information we're gleaning from this. So, by all means, let's continue to revert the particularly obnoxious changes, but asking them to "stop it" will simply make it invisible.
A little late for that since my phone is ringing off the hook with reporters interested in the story. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l