[WikiEN-l] Attack blogs in WP:LIVING articles

[Ryan Wetherell]

I agree that the link should be in [[Anne Milton]], but with some kind
of warning of content.  We already do this in a lot of articles,
including, say, scientific theories, where we have supportive and
opposing external links.  Now I know that theories and people are
different things, but I don't see the problem of excluding a notable
outside link, even if it is critical.

--Ryan

On 12/4/06, David Boothroyd <david at election.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> I should like to clarify the issue in this dispute. The question is
> not whether the blog is a 'source'; it is clearly not a source for
> anything other than what is said on the blog. The issue is whether or
> not to mention it in the article; the subsidiary issue is, should that
> question be answered in the affirmative, it should be linked to.
>
> My position is that the answer to both questions is Yes. The following
> reasons justify mentioning the blog:
>
> 1) The blog has been mentioned twice in the (UK) national press. The
> first was in Damian Whitworth, "A strange case of espionage and warfare
> inside the commuter belt", The Times, April 18, 2005, p. 28. The second
> was Rod Liddle, "Battle of the Guildford gals", The Sunday Times, May 1,
> 2005, p. 15. I have undertaken an extensive search and have yet to find
> any other site set up to target an individual candidate being mentioned
> in the press. This is therefore a unique situation.
>
> 2) The blog has also been mentioned by Sandra Howard (wife of the
> then Leader of the Opposition) in her election campaign blog.
> http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=sandra.howard.page&obj_id=122745
>
> 3) The fact that Anne Milton is quoted by Sandra Howard asserting that
> Tim Ireland was "stalking" her through the weblog is particularly
> significant. It is a notably extreme accusation.
>
> 4) It appears to be the only case where a blog about an MP has
> continued to be updated. There have been others, but they have all gone
> under. This one hasn't.
>
> 5) The author of the blog, Tim Ireland, is notable enough to have an
> article about him. His notability is for his work on political blogs.
>
> 6) I do not propose to mention this in the article, but in my submission
> the edit wars engaged in by supporters of Anne Milton (including by IP
> addresses traced to the Parliamentary estate) who attempt to remove all
> mention of it from the article, denote that it is considered notable by
> them. See the article history.
>
> I do not see how WP:BLP is engaged merely by mentioning that a critical
> blog exists. It is potentially engaged by reporting Anne Milton's
> reaction, but that has an unimpeachable source in The Times piece.
>
> Now Guy imputes to me motives other than improving the encyclopaedia
> to explain why I think it should be mentioned. This is really neither
> here nor there to the merits of the case but I would invite anyone
> wishing to examine the issue to look at my contributions on Talk:Anne
> Milton starting in June.
>
> Should the first question be decided in the affirmative, that the
> blog is notable enough to be mentioned, then should it be linked? I
> submit the answer is clearly "Yes". Once the article mentions the blog,
> inquiring readers may wish to look at it for themselves. It simply
> makes no sense to say that the blog is notable but yet not linkable.
> Even the Wikipedia article on Goatse.cx links to a mirror to it.
> I would make a proviso that the link to the blog should make clear
> that the site is not in any sense neutral. It might also be
> reasonable, though I don't think warranted, to have the site
> address in text rather than as a hyperlink.
>
> Perhaps I should say that as I understand Guy's position, he considers
> that a link to the blog is acceptable from [[Tim Ireland]] but not
> from [[Anne Milton]]. I cannot understand the internal logic of such a
> position.
> --
> David Boothroyd - http://www.election.demon.co.uk
> david at election.demon.co.uk (home)
> dboothroyd at westminster.gov.uk (council)
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>