On 17 January 2011 00:50, wiki doc.wikipedia@ntlworld.com wrote:
I don't think it helps to characterise any simple questioning of the leader as a "deranged vendetta".
Simple questioning isn't what I call a "deranged vendetta". Snide innuendo of the most slimy kind is what I refer to.
As I said, I question the purpose and utility of leading the discussion down this rabbit hole. The discussion of a simple test statement typed during the first stages of the wiki, and its' possible applications as a motto for the project describing its purpose in a simple two-word phrase, somehow became a discussion about the truthfulness of an individual. That isn't helpful.
And for the avoidance of doubt, I was referring to Anthony's decision to drag in a reference to pointless blog discussion thread about Jimmy Wales' birth date.
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 8:32 PM, Tony Sidaway tonysidaway@gmail.com wrote:
And for the avoidance of doubt, I was referring to Anthony's decision to drag in a reference to pointless blog discussion thread about Jimmy Wales' birth date.
I guess one person's "pointless blog discussion thread" is another person's "proper source". (http://blog.jimmywales.com/2007/08/08/my-birthdate/)
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 8:32 PM, Tony Sidaway tonysidaway@gmail.com wrote:
And for the avoidance of doubt, I was referring to Anthony's decision to drag in a reference to pointless blog discussion thread about Jimmy Wales' birth date.
I guess one person's "pointless blog discussion thread" is another person's "proper source". (http://blog.jimmywales.com/2007/08/08/my-birthdate/)
Or, if you need the whole story:
In 2004 Wales says his birthdate is August 7 (http://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=Board_of_Trustees&diff=...). In 2006 he posts a message to Talk:Jimmy Wales asking for changes to be made to his article, stating among other things, that "My date of birth is not August 8, 1966." (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jimmy_Wales&diff=63246911...). Then, in 2007 he tells a reporter that the Wikipedia given date of August 7 is incorrect, that "They [Wikipedia] got it from (Encyclopedia) Britannica," "and Britannica got it wrong." (http://blog.oregonlive.com/siliconforest/2007/07/on_wikipedia_and_its_founde...) He then posts to his blog that "for the first time the world has a proper source", linking to that reporters blog. (http://blog.jimmywales.com/2007/08/08/my-birthdate/) Then, in 2010, he posts to Talk:Jimmy Wales that "I was born on the 7th of August, according to my mother. My legal paperwork all says 8th of August, due to an error on my birth certificate." (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&...)
The point being that trusting Jimmy Wales when it comes to seemingly trivial matters is not a good idea, because Jimmy Wales lies about seemingly trivial matters. And putting unsubstantiated statements made by Jimmy Wales into a Wikipedia article, without properly attributing them to him, is also a mistake, for the same reason.
On 17 January 2011 04:03, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
Or, if you need the whole story:
I think you've just proven Tony's point.
- d.
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 2:36 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 January 2011 04:03, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
Or, if you need the whole story:
I think you've just proven Tony's point.
Glad to be of service.
On 17 January 2011 04:03, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
Then, in 2010, he posts to Talk:Jimmy Wales that "I was born on the 7th of August, according to my mother. My legal paperwork all says 8th of August, due to an error on my birth certificate." (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&...)
The point being that trusting Jimmy Wales when it comes to seemingly trivial matters is not a good idea, because Jimmy Wales lies about seemingly trivial matters. And putting unsubstantiated statements made by Jimmy Wales into a Wikipedia article, without properly attributing them to him, is also a mistake, for the same reason.
Jimmy taking his birthdate as that which his mother tells him rather than that which is on his birth certificate doesn't sound like a lie to me. A lie is saying something that you know to be untrue, this is simply a disagreement regarding what is true.
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Jimmy taking his birthdate as that which his mother tells him rather than that which is on his birth certificate doesn't sound like a lie to me. A lie is saying something that you know to be untrue, this is simply a disagreement regarding what is true.
Assuming his *latest* story is the truth (and it seems to be), the lies would be when he told the reporter that August 7 was incorrect, when he told Encyclopedia Britannica that August 7 was incorrect, when he told the reporter that Wikipedia got the date from Britannica, and when he referenced the reporters story on his blog saying "for the first time the world has a proper source".
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Jimmy taking his birthdate as that which his mother tells him rather than that which is on his birth certificate doesn't sound like a lie to me. A lie is saying something that you know to be untrue, this is simply a disagreement regarding what is true.
Assuming his *latest* story is the truth (and it seems to be), the lies would be when he told the reporter that August 7 was incorrect, when he told Encyclopedia Britannica that August 7 was incorrect, when he told the reporter that Wikipedia got the date from Britannica, and when he referenced the reporters story on his blog saying "for the first time the world has a proper source".
It sounds to me more like he didn't know the truth himself, and his mother later told him what the source of the confusion was. No need to accuse anyone of lying, as far as I can see.
Carcharoth
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Carcharoth carcharothwp@googlemail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Jimmy taking his birthdate as that which his mother tells him rather than that which is on his birth certificate doesn't sound like a lie to me. A lie is saying something that you know to be untrue, this is simply a disagreement regarding what is true.
Assuming his *latest* story is the truth (and it seems to be), the lies would be when he told the reporter that August 7 was incorrect, when he told Encyclopedia Britannica that August 7 was incorrect, when he told the reporter that Wikipedia got the date from Britannica, and when he referenced the reporters story on his blog saying "for the first time the world has a proper source".
It sounds to me more like he didn't know the truth himself, and his mother later told him what the source of the confusion was. No need to accuse anyone of lying, as far as I can see.
No, he made a comment similar to the one he made in 2010, in 2004, which he later had oversighted, to try to cover up his later lies.
--- "My actual birthday is August 7th, 1966. This is unverifiable information, I'm sorry to say, since my driver's license and passport say August 8. If we must revert on that basis, then I guess we must... Maybe I'll have to upload a signed note from my mom as documentary evidence; the only proof that I have is her sayso." ---
That's what he said September 18, 2004. So no, this wasn't an honest mistake (which still would be reason not to trust what he says). And it wasn't even just Wales being misleading, as he so often does. This was an intentional lie.
So I don't trust what he says about the first edit to Wikipedia. It may be true. It may not be true. We'll probably never know.
On 17 January 2011 16:55, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
That's what he said September 18, 2004. So no, this wasn't an honest mistake (which still would be reason not to trust what he says). And it wasn't even just Wales being misleading, as he so often does. This was an intentional lie.
If he was intentionally lying, he must have had a motive. What motive could he possibly have for lying about his age by a day? Do you think he was just doing it to be annoying? Jimmy has plenty of faults (we all do), but being annoying for the sake of it isn't one of them in my experience.
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 January 2011 16:55, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
That's what he said September 18, 2004. So no, this wasn't an honest mistake (which still would be reason not to trust what he says). And it wasn't even just Wales being misleading, as he so often does. This was an intentional lie.
If he was intentionally lying, he must have had a motive. What motive could he possibly have for lying about his age by a day?
He was definitely intentionally lying, either in 2004 and 2010, or in 2007. So there is no "if", and that means he must have had a motive. However, I don't see the point in speculating over what that motive was, as we don't even know for sure which of the times he was lying.
Do you think he was just doing it to be annoying?
No.
Jimmy has plenty of faults (we all do), but being annoying for the sake of it isn't one of them in my experience.
Not mine either. So why do you bring it up?
As a Queensland schoolboy, I watched the Apollo 11 landing on 21 July 1969, received through Australia's radio telescopes at Parkes and Honeysuckle Creek, while at the same instant it was late on 20 July 1969 for the American audience basking in a glow of rightful pride. Perhaps Jimmy was playing some similar game - the same moment in time can belong to two different dates.
I have to report that I always believed the confusion over Jimmy Wales' birthdate to be a covert and ingenious attempt to demonstrate to the community the need to use the facts given in reliable sources, and not to prefer what might be honestly expressed views but which are not supported by reliable sources. Perhaps I may have too conspiratorial a mind.
Nevertheless, there are similar disputes for other articles. See the biography of the great playwright Sir Terence Rattigan for a case where the date of birth is also in dispute to the tune of one day, and where reliable sources are in disagreement: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terence_Rattigan
I had to deal with a case where the dispute was over a year, where it is possible to guess at which date is the more likely: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emlyn_Garner_Evans
On 17 January 2011 22:58, Sam Blacketer sam.blacketer@gmail.com wrote:
Nevertheless, there are similar disputes for other articles. See the biography of the great playwright Sir Terence Rattigan for a case where the date of birth is also in dispute to the tune of one day, and where reliable sources are in disagreement: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terence_Rattigan I had to deal with a case where the dispute was over a year, where it is possible to guess at which date is the more likely: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emlyn_Garner_Evans
Or [[Alan Vega]], where it's out *ten* years, and the official date arguably doesn't match biographical details. There's a pile of stuff on the talk page. It's now listed in a "Myth" section, though I don't expect that to be stable either.
- d.
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Sam Blacketer sam.blacketer@gmail.com wrote:
I have to report that I always believed the confusion over Jimmy Wales' birthdate to be a covert and ingenious attempt to demonstrate to the community the need to use the facts given in reliable sources, and not to prefer what might be honestly expressed views but which are not supported by reliable sources.
I don't know about ingenious. Anyone who knows Wales and his predilection for making misleading statements which are nonetheless literally true (a la a hero/heroine in an Ayn Rand novel) would have figured out what he was doing quite readily. And then admonished for not "assuming good faith" when they pointed it out.
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 January 2011 16:55, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
That's what he said September 18, 2004. So no, this wasn't an honest mistake (which still would be reason not to trust what he says). And it wasn't even just Wales being misleading, as he so often does. This was an intentional lie.
If he was intentionally lying, he must have had a motive. What motive could he possibly have for lying about his age by a day?
"having fun" (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jimmy_Wales&diff=40068551...)
Basically, the same reason most people try to get falsehoods inserted into Wikipedia.