[WikiEN-l] Another "BADSITES" controversy

[William Pietri]

jayjg wrote:
>>  Now, granted, there are
>> relatively few occasions where a link to a site such as Wikipedia Review
>> is beneficial to the project, but it should be acknowledged that these
>> occasions exist,
>>     
>
> Actually, I can't think of any occasion where such a link would be
> beneficial to the project. What exactly did you have in mind?
>   


I can think of four classes of occasion:

   1. When the site is the topic of an article or the source for an article,
   2. As part of a policy discussion around WP:BADSITES or any related
      policy,
   3. As part of a collection of evidence as to why a particular site is
      banned, and
   4. When a Wikipedia participant's behavior on or participation in one
      of those sites is raised as an issue in any on-WP proceeding, like
      an RFA or anything in dispute resolution.


If the first hasn't happened yet, it will eventually. As people never 
tire of pointing out, we're a top-10 website, so like it or not, our 
critics will eventually become notable just for opposing us. For 
example, see:

    http://www.forbes.com/2005/03/07/cx_cw_0308hate_print.html

The second and third are pretty normal things we do when discussing and 
implementing policy. Indeed, on current trends I expect BADSITES will 
never become a solid policy because the suppression of relevant 
information is antithetical to the way we get anywhere together.

As to the last, the nature and extent of one's participation in a 
BADSITE seems like a relevant factor to me, especially in questions of 
discipline or community trust.

William