[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia is ... free web hosting?

[Rory Stolzenberg]

On Jan 29, 2008 6:31 PM, Peter Ansell <ansell.peter at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 30/01/2008, Rory Stolzenberg <rory096 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 28, 2008 9:10 PM, Peter Ansell <ansell.peter at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 29/01/2008, Rory Stolzenberg <rory096 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Jan 28, 2008 6:03 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Jan 28, 2008 5:41 PM, Nathan <nawrich at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Except that this one is a small group of admins (mostly) in
> > > userspace
> > > > > > and there hasn't been any enraged reports of hacking. Are there
> > > > > > policies related to linking *into* Wikipedia? I'd be surprised.
> I
> > > > > > think (but I'm not 100% sure) that this has already survived an
> MfD.
> > > > >
> > > > > I missed that fact, but that just makes it all the more baffling.
> > > > >
> > > > > Using CSS hacks to hide the site and make it claim to be some
> other
> > > > > domain is pretty darn outrageous... at least the airline didn't
> use
> > > > > clever kludges to rewrite the page.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I wouldn't really call that a CSS hack, considering they could have
> also
> > > > done it using a magic word ({{DISPLAYTITLE}}). It doesn't seem to be
> > > using
> > > > Wikipedia as a web host, more like using the domain to make a parody
> > > page in
> > > > userspace more amusing/realistic.
> > >
> > > Gotta say its pretty close to free web host. Anyone that buys a domain
> > > and redirects it to wikipedia is using wikipedia non-profit foundation
> > > funds for something that is completely unrelated to the encyclopedia.
> > > The userpage guidelines and the what wikipedia is not policy have been
> > > designed specifically to restrict this frivolous use of bandwidth and
> > > server resources, although the community may have enough powerful
> > > supporters to make it an exception, it would break the rule and not be
> > > consistent IMO. Recent happenings with spoofing the wikipedia UI may
> > > also come into play.
> > >
> > > Its always hard to say anything bad about humour pages that
> > > established wikipedians create, but buying a domain and making a
> > > straight redirect without prior authorisation from the non-profit
> > > foundation is pretty clear.
> > >
> > > On a side note, I am completely anti putting underage childrens photos
> > > on personal user pages. It is utterly irresponsible for a parent to do
> > > that. But that isn't really the issue here.
> > >
> > > Peter Ansell
> >
> >
> > The only thing they're using WMF funds for would be the hosting, and
> it's a
> > userspace page like several others, and it's been kept in MfD. It's not
> like
> > this is using the foundation as a host for something completely
> irrelevant-
> > this is a parody Wikipedia cabal, for which the creators decided to buy
> a
> > domain to redirect to it. I don't see what the problem is.
>
> People keep referring to a discussion that only lasted a few hours as
> evidence that the community supports the idea, as opposed to a few
> admins who were alerted to the page, including the participants who
> purchased the domain to use with wikimedia hosting. Wikipedia Cabals
> are, perhaps surprisingly to you, totally irrelevant to the purpose of
> the encyclopedia. If wikipedia is going to host websites for people it
> might as well say it instead of proclaiming the no free web hosting
> statement as policy (except when its an admin who gets special
> treatment). If this is meant to be simply ignored because its a joke
> then it isn't succeeding.
>
> Peter
>

What I'm saying is that this is no difference from, say,
[[User:Ryulong/Penguin Cabal]] or any others on the list at [[WP:LOC]] (the
penguin one was just the first I scrolled to), just because some domain
redirects to it.