anonymity is a great thing about the web, and you can be who u want2b whether thats the dungeonmaster or a 13 year old girl. Its only when wikipedia starts reaching out of peoples homes and when the legular editor get into 100, 000s that it probably would be a problem. And anyway there is nothing on wiki that isn't available within a few clicks of a mouse. I see you point.
On 07/06/07, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) newyorkbrad@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/7/07, michael west michawest@gmail.com wrote:
mmmm ok, I'm really not in favor of any kid publisizing their age on the net. Myspace must be a hunters paradise for guys into kids. I think that age should never come into it and things like what to write about in your user page should be on every new editor welcome template.
But that certainly doesn't proclude anybody from being an active wikipedian :-)
On 07/06/07, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) newyorkbrad@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/7/07, michael west michawest@gmail.com wrote:
The 11yr old withdrew his nomination. He'd only been editing for 3months and 500 of his cout were on his own pages! He'd also, posted a blocked on somebodies page. (Perhaps out of spite or just not an admin yet). Most of the critism was ok, but but lad didn't know what hit him. On his user page he says he's taken a wikibreak! awww. Sometimes a lot of the kids act more maturely than the adults. Michael
On 07/06/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 07/06/07, Joe Szilagyi szilagyi@gmail.com wrote:
And, I wager if he hadn't said he was 11 years old, and he'd
passed,
people
would shat themselves later when seven years from now he would be
old
enough
to run for Board of Directors. Or ArbCom, when he got his driver's
license!
Oh, he could run for ArbCom. If he got it, though, he'd be the arbitrator without checkuser or oversight ...
- d.
We have at least a couple of 12 y/o admins, self-identified as such,
right
now. For that matter, I nominated a candidate that age last month (he
was
supported 27/0/0 at one point, although ultimately consensus wasn't reached). The age issue came up in a few of the oppose comments but it
was
pretty clear from the context that those editors would have opposed
anyway.
I've never seen chronological age actually change the outcome of an RfA
and,
despite the occasional "ageist" comment, Wiki projects are pretty much
more
egalitarian age-wise than almost any other part of society I can think
of.
Newyorkbrad
I don't think that Wikipedians mentioning their ages on-wiki is a huge problem as long as too much personal identifying information isn't being given. There has been a movement to delete age categories for younger editors and the like, which is fine to prevent any perception that we are facilitating anyone being exploited, but if all you know about a person is an age and a state or country, there is not too much risk.
I do grow concerned sometimes when younger administrators choose to edit under their real names and locations. Not so much because of the conventional WP:CHILD type concerns, as this is a pretty sophisticated population, but because they may be uniquely subject to real-life harassment by trolls or external sites if they happen to do something controversial.
Newyorkbrad _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l