[WikiEN-l] Is Slate an attack site?

[charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com]

"Thatcher131 Wikipedia" wrote

> The position I have tried to argue on this issue is that going to
> SlimVirgin's talk page or some other talk or project page to post,
> "See, even Slate thinks you are a spy" would be actionable harassment
> that should be removed, but that this should have no effect on the use
> of Slate as a reference in any article where it is appropriate.

I agree with that. No question, WP:HARASS and WP:RS give an extensive coverage of cases where gratuitous links can be removed
 
> However, I disagree with Fred that the "remove every mention of a site
> that contains an attack even from articles" is a strawman.  I believe
> that argument has been made in connection with several sites, on the
> basis of, "as a top ten site we should not reward bad people with
> links."  Perhaps it was made in bad faith by provacateurs, but I
> believe it has been made.

Well, the issue here is perhaps not what policy is, but whether John Lee is pursuing advocates of BADSITES with the intention of beating them over the head with a corn dolly. The business about "rewarding" is a classic pedia/media confusion. Wikipedia adds to articles only those links that serve the encyclopedia purpose. 

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam