On 19 Oct 2007 at 12:20:49 -0400, "David Goodman" dgoodmanny@gmail.com wrote:

I've just come across a link to Wikipedia Review in an AN/I archive. It was inserted by a member of ArbCom in the announcement of an action of theirs to give the justification.

That doesn't surprise me. When I was compiling evidence to present in the recent ArbCom case, I came up with several examples of people who clearly regarded sites such as that as horrendous scum... and who linked to them in order to make whatever point they were trying to make about the sites or the people who participate in them. Being restrained from linking to something that's relevant to a point you're making is not something that comes naturally, even to many of the people who find the sites in question to be repugnant. Back before various editors, admins, and the ArbCom began making a fuss about linking to so-called "attack sites" about a year ago, it was very commonplace to link to them in order to criticize them (putting the lie to assertions, sometimes heard, that it was "always" the common practice to ban such links and that the ArbCom was only ratifying this "common sense" practice), and even after that it has sometimes happened despite all the wikidrama about such links.