[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia article on [[Santorum (neologism)]]

[George Herbert]

With all due respect, Fred, I believe the article either complied or
came very close to complying with WP policy when this discussion
started here.

Your opinion that it did not has been communicated, but you do not
have consensus that there is in fact a problem requiring being solved
here.

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at fairpoint.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I've dropped Cirt a note and link to this thread, in case they weren't
>>> aware
>>> of it.
>>>
>>> As mentioned before, what is at the root of this is a wider problem
>>> though:
>>> to what extent we as a project are happy to act as participants, rather
>>> than
>>> neutral observers and reporters, in the political process.
>>>
>>> I'd say that neutrality is our best bet here, as anything else is
>>> likely to
>>> come back to us eventually. We should not make *undue* efforts to
>>> promote
>>> political or social campaigns.
>>>
>>> There is little in present policy to address this. WP:Activist is an
>>> essay.
>>>
>>> Andreas
>>
>> I completely disagree with the direction of this thread that this was
>> some sort of hit piece by Cirt on Santorum.
>>
>> When this started I re-read the article and found it neutral and
>> presenting Santorum's reaction to the situation in a reasonable and
>> thoughtful manner.
>>
>> Dan Savage is certainly playing activist here - the claim that Cirt
>> was is not supported, and not in good faith.
>>
>>
>> --
>> -george william herbert
>> george.herbert at gmail.com
>
> The matter can be resolved by editing which conforms the article to
> Wikipedia policies.
>
> Fred
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>



-- 
-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com