[WikiEN-l] Suppression of links to 'attack sites'?

[Daniel R. Tobias]

Recently, [[User:DennyColt]] has created an essay article, 
[[WP:BADSITES]], that advocates banning all links to sites that are 
considered to be "attack sites".  Although this is an essay, and 
explicitly says that it is not a policy, he then proceeded to invoke 
his own essay in pursuing a draconian campaign to suppress all links 
to Wikpedia Review, an anti-Wikipedia web forum.  In doing so, he did 
things that are normally considered to be against Wikipedia policy, 
such as altering other people's comments on talk and project pages, 
and editing archive pages and closed AfDs.

While I am on the record as strongly critical of the tone and 
atmosphere of the WR site, I am also strongly against the imposition 
of a flat ban on linking to it, even on user, talk, and project 
pages.  This is part of a consistent position I have of opposing all 
flat bans on linking to particular sites other than blatant spam 
sites of the "Buy Herbal Viagra Now" variety (and even *those* might 
have rare cases where links to them are appropriate, such as when 
methods used by spammers are being discussed and criticized).

When one is engaged in a discussion about those sites themselves, and 
the people on them, and the things they're saying, we are tying our 
own hands if we can't cite specific things there in the course of the 
discussion.  For instance, there's a very interesting thread that 
discusses this very "anti-attack-site" campaign:

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=7988

I don't know about the merits of the legal claims that guy is making 
(does fair use for the purpose of commentary require citing and 
linking to the source?) but some of his points about how absurd 
various talk-page comments became once "redacted" by Denny are right 
on target.  But how would I be able to comment on this if I weren't 
allowed to link to the thread involved?

We should "know thine enemy"; we shouldn't act like a mind-control 
cult trying to stop its members from finding out about critics and 
what they have to say, but we should encourage our editors to read 
such criticism -- and refute it on the many occasions where it's 
wrongheaded.  But occasionally the critics say something right, too.  
Anyway, when they're threatening to sue Wikipedia and its editors, 
shouldn't we make ourselves aware of this?  Banning all links to the 
site would prevent that too.
-- 
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/