[Foundation-l] Racism in Commons

Oldak Quill oldakquill at gmail.com
Wed Dec 5 19:50:04 UTC 2007

On 05/12/2007, Durova <nadezhda.durova at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Why bother? Good old William of Occam would have made a fantastic
> > Wikimedian. You've got a simple, quick, and easy solution to a pretty bad
> > problem. Why hesitate and go in for something more complicated? Don't
> > understand the reason to overcomplicate. Or, alternatively, you could ban
> > him from uploading any more politics-related images...
> >
> > Honestly, though, if we get to the stage where 50 percent of one guy's
> > picture gallery labels him as a Neo-Nazi - complete fringe theory -
> Commons
> > need to learn something from enwiki and toughen up. There's a word for
> that
> > we use at enwiki: POV-pushing. This is not acceptable and we don't really
> > need any more bad press at the moment, not with Durova/!! all over the
> > Register.
> En.wikipedia has a lot more problems and disgruntled users than Commons ever
> has, and I don't believe it is purely due to size or reputation. We're more
> easy-going at Commons and we try to talk to and help people before clicking
> the block button and pissing them off - you'd be surprised how many times
> I've explained one point of policy to someone who would otherwise have been
> blocked for uploading copyvios or such after repeated warnings, and they
> realised a point they hadn't understood before and became decent
> contributors. Policy and copyright are hard to understand and blocking is
> not the way to educate people.
> en.wp does not do things perfectly; and no, they aren't the perfect older
> sibling for the little ones to look up to. En.wp is more like the rebellious
> older sibling who became a rock star and wildly famous, but is also slowly
> killing itself with drugs and alcohol. Just because it makes a lot of money
> and has a lot of fans doesn't mean the little siblings should mimic its
> behaviour.
> --Ayelie
>   (Editor at Large)
> ******
> Could I ask for a retraction, please?
> I've been keeping my head low for two weeks in the hopes that things would
> blow over.  Yes, I'm in the Register now.  And unfortunately in a couple of
> more mainstream news sources also.  None of them contacted me for comment
> before running the story.  And due to the way dispute resolution progressed
> I had no fair opportunity to present my side of events onsite, either.
> I unblocked the editor as soon as I realized I was mistaken, apologized
> repeatedly, sought to make amends, invited scrutiny, and pledged
> improvements.  What more can I do?
> I'm not Essjay.  I haven't lied about my credentials or misled any
> reporters.  I've volunteered for Wikipedia for two years and 20,000 edits
> and handled some of the site's most difficult disputes.  Please assume good
> faith.
> This reads like an implication that I've sought this attention, and that I'm
> a substance abuser.  None of that is true.

Isn't this going slightly off-topic? Trying to stand on Essjay's
shoulders while you're both drowning isn't going to save anyone. For
what it's worth, I don't see how Essjay's actions were wrong - since
we don't require any credentials to edit, it matters not whether he
lied about having credentials that he didn't. He just played a game in
trying to assume credibility he didn't have, at least he didn't harm

Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)

More information about the foundation-l mailing list