[WikiEN-l] Thousands of *awful* articles on websites

[charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com]

Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote

> On Wednesday 03 January 2007 16:20, charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com wrote:
> >
> > No, since when has attaching 'Nazi' to something been an acceptable way to
> > argue? Don't quote Seinfeld to me. I'm not American, I don't watch it. That
> > goes also for others on the list. You 'come on'. Stop being an ethnocentric
> > jerk.
> 
> Oh, grow up.
> 
> It was funny.  And appropriate.
> 
> If you're that thin-skinned that you find it upsetting, then you DESERVE to be 
> upset.

Actually, it wasn't funny. It wasn't even a joke, as far as I can see. It wss intended to re-open the old deletionist-inclusionist schism. The Cunctator, having been a face of some eminence on enWP in the early days, pops up here again. Welcome back, I say; but please don't assume we're in the same timewarp as you. Matters such as reliable sourcing for articles are not now regarded as optional: we are more sensitive on the issue. Someone who posts here on the topic of unsourced articles about websites might expect a reasoned argument, in line with the current policies, rather than that.

Furthermore Godwin's Law applies: call someone a Nazi, you LOSE the argument.

And "If you're that thin-skinned that you find it upsetting, then you DESERVE to be upset" is not only crass, offensive stuff, if typical enough of the depths to which this list has sunk. (Can we please please moderate some of these folk? This is becoming troll city.) It seems to be aimed at everyone who might not understand the context. 

I really don't think I'm the one who is maturity-challenged here. 

Charles


-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software 
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information