-----Original Message----- From: The Mangoe [mailto:the.mangoe@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@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.
Fred