[WikiEN-l] Time to reboot wikien-l

[joshua.zelinsky at yale.edu]

Quoting jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com>:

> On Nov 21, 2007 1:31 PM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 21/11/2007, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Nov 21, 2007 1:02 PM,  <joshua.zelinsky at yale.edu> wrote:
>>
>> > > > doing so was the same. Crappy links are deleted for all sorts of
>> > > > reasons, mostly because they're crappy, even if they would also have
>> > > > been deleted under that strawman BADSITES policy.
>>
>> > > Except none of these were crappy links.
>>
>> > They looked like crappy links to me, but I could be wrong. Any specifics?
>>
>>
>> The deletion of encyclopedic links to nielsenhayden.com by Will Beback.
>
> That old chestnut? It's the other strawman used as the rallying cry.
> Will realized he made an error, and apologized profusely. The whole
> issue was over long ago, but anti-BADSITES people bring it up again
> and again and again, as that one incident has been extremely useful.
>
> People misapply *real* policy every day, we don't then say OMG BAD
> POLICY, IT MUST GO!!!!!
>
>>
>>
>> > > These were links that would have been
>> > > included in article space but for the fact that they contained 
>> material we
>> > > didn't like.
>>
>> > Err, "containing material we don't like" pretty much covers every link
>> > ever deleted from Wikipedia.
>>
>>
>> ... for other than encyclopedic reasons.
>
> One man's encyclopedic reasons...

Jayjg, kindly make up your mind. Are you defending things like the removal of
Making Light or not? At the top of this post you assert that such things were
wrong, and at the bottom you seem to be arguing that removal of otherwise good
external links is ok and moreover constitute an encyclopedic reason to remove
the links which is hard to understand given the serious NPOV violations 
that it
entails and the fact that these are links that but for the mention of
Wikipedians we would have in the articles.