[Foundation-l] English Wikipedia ethnocentric policy affects other communities

[GerardM]

On 12/24/06, Michael Noda <michael.noda at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/23/06, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hoi,
> > I am a person. I have a name. You know me by my nick, GerardM, you may
> have
> > deduced that I am known as Gerard Meijssen. You are not likely to know
> my
> > full name.
>
> Indeed.  But, would I really be in a different position if you
> appeared in the recent changes log as GerardM (535367), which is how
> you appear on Slashdot?  Does Slashdot reduce you to *just* a number,
> or are you a name there as well?  To me, GerardM (535367) is as much a
> name as GerardM, because it's the same name.


On Slashdot my name is shown as GerardM and my Karma: Excellent. Slashdot
associates me with a number.. there is not much that I can do about it. I
resent it. It may be that to you GerardM (535367) and GerardM are the same
.. I will not react to the first when addressed like that.

> In the Netherlands in the second world war, people had to identify
> > themselves and always have their "persoonsbewijs" with them. At the end
> of
> > the war this was abolished. The Dutch government imposed itself by
> requiring
> > people to have a number and then to always be able to have some form of
> > identity with them. Many people resent this. I resent this. It is said
> that
> > it promotes security while in actual fact it makes government more
> > intruisive while it hardly helps .. mind you I have a background in
> > security.
>
> I see; I thought there might be a cultural difference like this at the
> heart of your objection.  But I reiterate my question: would imitating
> Slashdot be unacceptable, and if so, why do you post there?


When I read /. it says GerardM, they do not show this pesky number. Also I
do not associate myself with /. in the same way I do with the WMF. /. is
news for nerds.

> The other thing that I have noticed is that in the proposals it is only
> the
> > people from outside the English language Wikipedia who are forced to do
> > things. When it is suggested that the en.wikipedia community may have to
> do
> > things as well it is flatly rejected.
>
> I disagree.  All the proposals I've seen work symmetrically, where an
> en user on zh is treated identically to a zh user on en, or a ja user
> on nl.


Meaning that the proposals are ok because they insist on implementing bad
practice on other Wikipedias as well?

> Admins who go overboard in their heavy
> > handed zeal of fighting vandalism get a blanket excuse because ``they
> mean
> > well``.
>
> Have you been following news out of en lately?  Several admins have
> resigned or been forcibly desysopped by the ArbCom for overzealousness
> in vandal fighting in the last few months.


What news? If anything it is news on the English Wikipedia and it does not
necessarily gets much attention outside of its community,

> All in all, my conclusion is very much that, yes people say that the
> policy
> > is wrong, but no they do not want to accept that things will change.
> This
> > leads me to conclude that people in the English language Wikipedia see
> > themselves as a rule onto themselves and will not really consider the
> > arguments of others.
>
> This statement is very hurtful to those of us who are en editors who
> are making every effort to find an amicable solution to this
> unfortunate situation.  I beg you to retract or qualify it.
>
> -Michael Noda


What I have found is that as part of this fracas users are being de-blocked.
In essence the current practice is on the way out. That is indeed good news.
Arguments put forward by some did not consider anything outside of the
English language Wikipedia, from my perspective this is something that says
something about the people that use these arguments, not about all
en.wikipedia editors.

Thanks,
    GerardM

http://www.omegawiki.org/Expression:vesel%C3%A9_v%C3%A1noce