The following is a re-ordered version of what was passing (five votes) when I moved to close "Attack sites" last might. The redaction, apart from order, is to remove some principles that are pretty much common ground. I have preferred later passing versions of decimalized points. Charles 11) The selection of appropriate external links for an article is a matter of sound editorial judgment. 4.2) Linking to external sites which contain information harmful to another person so as to harass them is unacceptable. 15.1) Wikipedia should not link to websites set up for the purpose of or substantially devoted to harassing its volunteers. Harassment in this context refers to cyber-stalking, offline stalking, outing people without their consent, humiliating them sexually, or threatening them with physical violence. 22.1) Wikipedia users and administrators are expected to have made a realistic appraisal of the risks involved in volunteering for Wikipedia, to take appropriate precautions, and to deal with external pressures in a mature way. For example, it is predictable that Wikipedia and its users will from time to time be subjected to harsh, and occasionally unfair, criticism. This comes with the territory, and it is unseemly, even ridiculous, to react harshly to predictable phenomena. 7.2) Users have the right to expect harassment of themselves to be combated. Users who are not directly involved are encouraged to achieve this through the removal of personal attacks, removal of links to external harassment, and, in extreme cases, removal of references to attack sites; these activities are not subject to revert limits. 37) From time to time, Wikipedia users and administrators err, engaging in inappropriate activities which may come to our notice through external criticism. 38) Persons aggrieved by Wikipedia and its users, those banned, subjects who don't like the content of their article, subjects, or notable people, who attempt to edit and feel harassed, etc., sometimes attempt to fight back, and in addition to legitimate criticism, engage in name calling, create critical websites, attempt to determine the real identity of editors, create links to edit a user's page, etc. 39) Once struggle is commenced with Wikipedia, or one of its users, on an external site, Wikipedia users may attempt to respond with removal of links, or criticism of its initiator. This can rapidly degenerate into a struggle between aggrieved users and supporters of free expression or of the external site. 23) Satirical treatment of Wikipedia, its users, errors and policies is to be expected. 32) If an editor believes that the content of a prohibited link reveals a serious violation of Wikipedia policy, they may forward the link to the Committee for investigation. ---- 1) AntiSocialMedia.net, a creation of the banned user WordBomb is part of an extended campaign of harassment directed at several users. 4) In a number of cases, editors attempting in good faith to protect themselves and other Wikipedians from harassment have aggressively removed links and references to external sites, as well as discussions associated with them. 6) In a number of instances inappropriate attempts have been made to extend the principles of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MONGO to sites merely critical of Wikipedia and its users' behavior. Those principles and those applied in this case apply only to malicious websites. 8) Except for obvious cases, such as ED, it is difficult to sort out sites engaged in criticism of Wikipedia and its editors and administrators from sites engaged in harassment. Likewise, when information is provided about the alleged wrong-doings of Wikipedia users, it can be difficult to differentiate legitimate complaints from bogus ones calculated to cast a user in a false light. ---- 3.2) The community is encouraged to develop a policy compliant with Wikipedia's key policies regarding the circumstances, if any, under which "attack sites" may be linked. 4) All editors are encouraged to show due consideration for the feelings of other Wikipedians, and to refrain from idly or frivolously making references to malicious sites. 5.1) This decision applies only to links to AntiSocialMedia.net and similar sites which engage in malicious behavior toward Wikipedia users. Attempts to extend this remedy to sites critical of Wikipedia and its users' behavior are discouraged. 7) If you are dissatisfied with the article on you or your project, or regarding how you are treated on Wikipedia, please communicate on our talk pages, use our dispute resolution procedures, or contact the Wikimedia Foundation itself. ----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam