NPOV never covered false statements such as Wheeler made about the Jewish concentration camps of the Gulag. If you think it did you were mistaken. Such a statement would be acceptable only in the context of identifying it as an anti-semitic statement.
I wouldn't have thought so. I'd like to hear RK's opinion on the topic in general before feeling my qualms are addressed. He already considers page protection evidence of anti-Semitism.
Who in the blazes told you that?! I've got news for you: Pages are protected on Wikipedia all the time. I never called suchprotection racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic, anti-American, or anything else. What you have beem told about me has been exagerrated to the point of caricature. Why? Because some people want to avoid the issue on the rare articles (out of over 100,000) when they do arise.
If some people added anti-American propaganda and rhetoric to an article, and then protected the page, then that specific set of actions would be anti-American agitation, and it should be condemned as such. Similarly, if some people added anti-Jewish or anti-gay propaganda and rhetoric, and then protected the page, then that specific set of actions would be anti-Semitic or homophobic agitation, and it should be condemned as such. Note that this line of thought has been echoed by others (not just me) and that it bears no resemblance to what you think I believe.
By the way, I have over 300 articles on my "Watchlist", and I have seen many of these articles get protected. I also have seen some rather large flame wars on many of them, most of which I have chosen to ignore. In recent months, how many of times did I see someone do something anti-Jewish within an article? One article...out of *three hundred*. (Wheeler's attacks were in a Talk page.)
Heck, although I look at many of these 300 "Watch" articles, I just took a couple of months off from Wikipedia because (a) I had time-consuimg outside concerns (good things, mostly) and (b) I didn't have the energy or desire to get involved in flame wars. Wikipedia could probably cool down a bit if others took off for a week or a month every now and then. I've done it before, I'll do it again; I can even reccomend it. Heck, people who can't take time off are too tightly wound up in this project (like...Mr Natural Health.)
Robert
===== "No one is poor except he who lacks knowledge....A person who has knowledge has everything. A person who lacks knowledge, what has he? Once a person acquires knowledge, what does he lack? [Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim, 41a]
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
On 07/04/04 21:47, Robert wrote:
NPOV never covered false statements such as Wheeler made about the Jewish concentration camps of the Gulag. If you think it did you were mistaken. Such a statement would be acceptable only in the context of identifying it as an anti-semitic statement.
I wouldn't have thought so. I'd like to hear RK's opinion on the topic in general before feeling my qualms are addressed. He already considers page protection evidence of anti-Semitism.
Who in the blazes told you that?!
You did:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2004-June/013507.html
To quote you:
"Anthere has now clearly overstepped her authority. She has picked one version of an article which deleted and censored all info which did not agree with her her anti-Zionist views, and then she protected the page. This is outrageous behaviour from a Sysop."
Anthere's reply: http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2004-June/013524.html
View from a third party on what actually happened: http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2004-June/013522.html
That was three weeks ago, of course, so you can hardly be expected to remember it.
BTW, I agree with a lot of your views (though not all), but think you're a terrible advocate of them.
- d.
I have discovered the Paradigm which integrates science, and which debunks physics of its misconceptions.
An essay titled Debunking Physics and Discovery the Process of the Universe is posted at http://paradigm.blogharbor.com
A paradigm is not a theory. A paradigm is a specification of the results of our observations and experiments.
All the results of the observations and experiments of physics are specified by the Paradigm.
The application of the Paradigm is the future of science.
I invite your response.
Stephen Mooney
paradigm@westnet.com.au
On Mon, 5 Jul 2004 09:21:06 +1000, stephen mooney paradigm@westnet.com.au wrote:
I have discovered the Paradigm which integrates science, and which debunks physics of its misconceptions.
We're sorry, but Wikipedia does not allow original research; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research for details on this policy.
On Tue, 6 Jul 2004 11:51:54 -0400, Fennec Foxen fennec@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jul 2004 09:21:06 +1000, stephen mooney paradigm@westnet.com.au wrote:
I have discovered the Paradigm which integrates science, and which debunks physics of its misconceptions.
We're sorry, but Wikipedia does not allow original research; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research for details on this policy.
Don't you hate it when you get behind on a list and you're reading chronologically in threaded mode and you come to a thread and think no one has replied but in fact they've just changed the header and now it's buried under something totally different later on in the big old message list somewhere?
ANYWAY! :)
Fennec Foxen wrote:
Don't you hate it when you get behind on a list and you're reading chronologically in threaded mode and you come to a thread and think no one has replied but in fact they've just changed the header and now it's buried under something totally different later on in the big old message list somewhere?
I long since configured my newsreader to display these lists ordered by date, rather than by thread. People constantly reply out of the thread with a mail client that doesn't support references, and people constantly start new topics by clicking "reply" and changing the subject. The threading unfortunately does not give much information, it's not worth using.
-- Tim Starling