On 8/25/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/25/06, Anthony <wikilegal(a)inbox.org>
wrote:
My own thoughts on this suggest that it'd be enough to just stick a
big "WARNING: THIS WAS CREATED BY AN ANON" on the top of such articles
for a while, and keep them out of google searches.
But maybe you and certainly others see quarantine as something different.
WARNING: THIS WAS CREATED BY AN ANON
John B Smith is a man from New Jersey who was suspected in the death
of John F Kennedy Jr. Nothing was ever proven.
See the problem?
a) The statement isn't true; and b) the statement isn't referenced.
Of course c) the statement wouldn't survive today for more than a
couple minutes mainly due to the WP:BLP policy; d) that article could
be created just as easily by someone logged in as by someone not
logged in; and e) such a statement could be just as easily added to an
existing page as it could be added to a brand new one (and in fact it
would be much more likely to be caught if it was added to a brand new
article).
The Siegenthaler incident happened exactly once. Using it as an
excuse to shut down new article creation by "anons" makes as much
sense as permablocking the class A netblock which happened to create
the article.
I'm all for experimentation. When Jimbo announced the experiment to
limit new article creation I applauded it. But it's become rather
clear that this was never an experiment at all.
Anthony