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

Fred Bauder fredbaud at waterwiki.info
Fri Jul 6 02:34:10 UTC 2007

>-----Original Message-----
>From: The Mangoe [mailto:the.mangoe at gmail.com]
>Sent: Thursday, July 5, 2007 08:28 PM
>To: 'English Wikipedia'
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattackkk site link policy
>On 7/5/07, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at waterwiki.info> wrote:
>> This is acceptable as research into a Wikipedia event for our own purposes.
>> It has no place in any article as original research.
>Um, no. Simply citing an original source is not in itself original
>research, and in any case it can be (and really ought to be0 linked to
>as an external link. Anyway, whatever happened to "Wikipedia is not
>censored"? People should understand that links to external sites may
>lead them to less-than-pleasant reading experiences.
>I had not come across this thread before, but it seems to me that
>linking to it does improve the encyclopedia, in article space no less.
>The risk of people wandering off and finding the other (supposedly
>inaccurate) revelations of identity seems overstated in comparison;
>indeed, the thread really doesn't give any indication they are even
>there, as far as I can tell (except for the link to DB's "hivemind"
>pages, which at any given time may or may not be there).

Simply saying no doesn't work. The role of Essjay and how he assumed it is of internal value to us. We may legitimately engage in research concerning the incident. As a source for an encyclopedia article, however, it's not acceptable. As to censorship, we have always been limited to verifiable information from reliable published sources.


More information about the WikiEN-l mailing list