[WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattackkkkk site link policy

[Gwern Branwen]

On  0, Kamryn Matika <kamrynmatika at gmail.com> scribbled:
> On 7/2/07, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at waterwiki.info> wrote:
> >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Kamryn Matika [mailto:kamrynmatika at gmail.com]
> > >Sent: Monday, July 2, 2007 10:58 AM
> > >To: 'English Wikipedia'
> > >Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattackkk site link policy
> > >
> > >On 7/2/07, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at waterwiki.info> wrote:
> >
> > >>
> > >> I recall no arbitration ruling which relates to Wikipedia Review.
> > >>
> > >> Fred
> > >>
>
> > >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>
> > >>
> > >
> > >Why did you endorse my block if this is the case? The block was enacted
> > >solely on the ruling in the MONGO case and was applied to my reverting to
> > a
> > >version of a page that contained a reference to Wikipedia Review. If
> > there
> > >was no arbitration ruling that relates to Wikipedia Review, how is the
> > >justification for my block valid? Why did you support it?
> >
> > I didn't read the link right. In this case the link might be fine,
> > although Wikipedia Review is down right now. I don't support broad
> > generalization of the MONGO case. Glad we cleared that up. Maybe we can
> > resolve this. Who is it that thinks someone can be blocked for a link to
> > Wikipedia Review based on the MONGO case?
> >
> > Fred
> >
>
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>
> >
>
> Heh, okay... everyone makes mistakes.
>
> See [
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Essjay_controversy&diff=prev&oldid=140406328]
> this edit I made, and my talk page [
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:KamrynMatika&oldid=140412485]
> following it.
>
> It seems that (in this case) ElinorD and Crum375 believe that it is OK to
> block an editor for adding a link to Wikipedia Review. In this case, the
> link pertained to the article as it linked to a thread on Wikipedia Review
> where Essjay's deception was first brought to light, and (in my opinion)
> it's quite relevant. I was warned for adding the link, based on the MONGO
> ruling, and then blocked when I ignored the warning (my bad there I guess).
> Is this or is this not appropriate? Thanks.

I'd just like to note for the record that I stopped adding the link precisely because of a block threat; as Matika's followup and subsequent block shows, the threat was acted upon.

--
gwern
USCODE CISE SIRC CIM ISN DJC LLNL bemd SGC UNCPCJ CFC SABENA DREO CDA SADRS DRA
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20070702/2f50c4e0/attachment.pgp