Wikipedia:No factions of belief - WikiEN-l - lists.wikimedia.org

List overview All Threads
Download

Wikipedia:No factions of belief

Musings on fair use (was Re:...

Re: [WikiEN-l] CSD T1

Erik Moeller

17 May 2006 17 May '06

4:14 a.m.

Based on the discussion about divisive behavior and following my earlier comments, I have created a new policy proposal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_factions_of_belief Please comment! Thanks, Erik

Reply

Show replies by date

Keith Old

17 May 17 May

4:28 a.m.

On 5/17/06, Erik Moeller <eloquence(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Based on the discussion about divisive behavior and following my earlier comments, I have created a new policy proposal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_factions_of_belief Please comment! Thanks, Erik _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Erik, This looks like a good start for mine. Regards *Keith Old*

Reply

maru dubshinki

5:14 a.m.

On 5/17/06, Erik Moeller <eloquence(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Based on the discussion about divisive behavior and following my earlier comments, I have created a new policy proposal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_factions_of_belief Please comment! Thanks, Erik

I suppose exceptions will be made for upholding policy? It'd be pretty silly if we *weren't* a permament faction around certain beliefs. ~maru

Reply

Erik Moeller

5:16 a.m.

On 5/17/06, maru dubshinki <marudubshinki(a)gmail.com> wrote:

I suppose exceptions will be made for upholding policy? It'd be pretty silly if we *weren't* a permament faction around certain beliefs.

I added the following clarification to the intro earlier: "This policy does not concern groups of individuals who are merely articulating or enforcing the shared ideals and principles of the Wikipedia community in different ways (e.g. Wikipedia:Esperanza, Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit)." Is that what you're referring to? Erik

Reply

maru dubshinki

7 a.m.

On 5/17/06, Erik Moeller <eloquence(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On 5/17/06, maru dubshinki <marudubshinki(a)gmail.com> wrote:

I suppose exceptions will be made for upholding policy? It'd be pretty silly if we *weren't* a permament faction around certain beliefs.

I added the following clarification to the intro earlier: "This policy does not concern groups of individuals who are merely articulating or enforcing the shared ideals and principles of the Wikipedia community in different ways (e.g. Wikipedia:Esperanza, Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit)." Is that what you're referring to? Erik

Pretty much. There are still edge cases. For example, is it a shared ideal and principle of the Wikipedia community that we should only use free software and despise proprietary non-free software? (Ie. would it be legitimate to have a userbox stating that "this user hates nonfree software and works towards its demise", or must that be stated as "this user like free software"?) Or is our conception of freedom limited to the products of our labor like Mediawiki and the articles themselves? &etc. ~maru

Reply

Steve Bennett

7:49 a.m.

On 5/17/06, maru dubshinki <marudubshinki(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Pretty much. There are still edge cases. For example, is it a shared ideal and principle of the Wikipedia community that we should only use free software and despise proprietary non-free software? (Ie. would it

I would say no. Wikipedia can publish the same encyclopaedia without using free software. Therefore it's not a core ideal.

be legitimate to have a userbox stating that "this user hates nonfree software and works towards its demise", or must that be stated as "this user like free software"?) Or is our conception of freedom limited to the products of our labor like Mediawiki and the articles themselves? &etc.

What's the relevance? What does it have to do with the project? If you're working on articles about free software, why not a userbox "I work on articles about free software", as I proposed earlier? Steve

Reply

Philip Welch

5:03 p.m.

On May 17, 2006, at 12:00 AM, maru dubshinki wrote:

Pretty much. There are still edge cases. For example, is it a shared ideal and principle of the Wikipedia community that we should only use free software and despise proprietary non-free software? (Ie. would it be legitimate to have a userbox stating that "this user hates nonfree software and works towards its demise", or must that be stated as "this user like free software"?) Or is our conception of freedom limited to the products of our labor like Mediawiki and the articles themselves?

Wikipedians may, on average, be more in favor of free software than non-Wikipedians, but I'm loath to call it a shared ideal and principle. Most Wikipedians use non-free software on a daily basis, and for many Wikipedians, free software and free content is, in Wikipedia's case, a means to an end. Wikipedia must be free, and I help write Wikipedia. MediaWiki should be free, and while I don't help write MediaWiki, there are other members of the community who do. But I write other things too, and those other things aren't free, they're mine, and closely guarded as such. I'm sure some MediaWiki developers write non-free software as well. -- Philip L. Welch http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Philwelch

Reply

Peter Ansell

18 May 18 May

10:27 a.m.

On 5/17/06, maru dubshinki <marudubshinki(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On 5/17/06, Erik Moeller <eloquence(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Based on the discussion about divisive behavior and following my earlier comments, I have created a new policy proposal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_factions_of_belief Please comment! Thanks, Erik

I suppose exceptions will be made for upholding policy? It'd be pretty silly if we *weren't* a permament faction around certain beliefs. ~maru

And hence comes the definition of the wikipedian, by which all will follow, or forever be banned by autoblock from wikipedia. Peter

Reply

Peter Ansell

10:25 a.m.

On 5/17/06, Erik Moeller <eloquence(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Based on the discussion about divisive behavior and following my earlier comments, I have created a new policy proposal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_factions_of_belief Please comment! Thanks, Erik

It is still very ambiguous. You define beliefs and interests as if they are independent terms. I can state my shared interest in the religion and have it mean exactly the same thing as stating my belief in the religion. I dont see the practical difference in reading the two either. It is quite feasible to believe in wikipedia. Would that be banned as a statement. Or are wikipedians allowed to state their belief in their own organisation but not any other organisations. Also, prejudice should not happen with rationality. Rationality needs information though. And without prestating your belief, rationality will not take statements in the light they were given. It is not practical enough to say that the ideal case is always going to happen, and so we will not allow for cases where an encyclopedia needs to draw on areas where people need to state their views to get their messages across in the light they were intended. Peter

Reply

6546

days inactive

6547

days old

wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

8 comments

6 participants

tags (0)

participants (6)

Erik Moeller
Keith Old
maru dubshinki
Peter Ansell
Philip Welch
Steve Bennett