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

[Fred Bauder]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Kamryn Matika [mailto:kamrynmatika at gmail.com]
>Sent: Monday, July 2, 2007 03:35 PM
>To: 'English Wikipedia'
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattackkkkk site link policy
>
>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
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> >> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> >> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>> >>
>> >
>> >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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
>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.

Yes, you should not ignore the warning, but ElinorD and Crum375 are probably overdoing it. I say probably, because I don't speak for the whole Arbitration Committee and have not been able to look at the link you posted due to Wikipedia Review being down. I can understand their confusion however, as a number of users have been taking strong positions. Wikipedia Review is not subject to a site ban, only ED is. Unless something happens to change that... However, they are correct that it is possible to find some pretty nasty stuff on Wikipedia Review, and until recently on Daniel Brandt's site.

Fred