On Wed, 18 Apr 2012, David Gerard wrote:
If someone tells you to drive at 5 miles under the speed limit rather than
to drive at the speed limit, he may be trying to keep you from getting too
close to a line.
If someone tells you *not to drive at all* rather than to drive at the speed
limit, that
I think you can share any or all of the following rules of thumb, in order:
make proposed changes to talk pages.
ask other editors to help you update an article.
avoid editing articles about you/your organization directly,
unless you are fixing vandalism or typos, updating stats, or adding
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 18 April 2012 23:29, Ken Arromdee arrom...@rahul.net wrote:
On Wed, 18 Apr 2012, Charles Matthews wrote:
Sorry, this is exactly the point. The conversation where we explain very
patiently to
On 18 April 2012 12:48, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
PR people who edited Wikipedia get crucified. Counterattack: reduce
trust in Wikipedia.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120417113527.htm
Paper: http://www.prsa.org/Intelligence/PRJournal/
On the CREWE Facebook page,
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 1:17 AM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Continuation of conversation:
Look, we're all impressed with Wikipedia. But you seem to be saying that
to edit I have to put your project ahead of my day job; and so I think you
guys are just a bit
On 19 April 2012 12:31, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Continuation of conversation:
Look, we're all impressed with Wikipedia. But you seem to be saying that
to edit I have to put your project
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.comwrote:
On 4/19/12, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote:
You do realise that there have been over 5,000 newspaper articles on our
company in the last 10 years, and only three of them mention that product
recall?
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 1:41 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 April 2012 12:31, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Continuation of conversation:
Look, we're all impressed with
On Thu, 19 Apr 2012, Charles Matthews wrote:
If someone tells you to drive at 5 miles under the speed limit rather than
to drive at the speed limit, he may be trying to keep you from getting too
close to a line.
If someone tells you *not to drive at all* rather than to drive at the
speed
limit,
On 19 April 2012 15:22, Ken Arromdee arrom...@rahul.net wrote:
Rules can cause trouble, but they have one benefit: at least ideally, it's
clear when you have or haven't violated them. (Many Wikipedia rules are
not
ideal, but that's a discussion for another day.) It's a lot harder to
On 19 April 2012 15:34, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Those people, who do not have WP's
best interests at heart, are always arguing for a disconnect between the
letter and spirit of policy, because they have no interest at all in the
spirit.
Well, yes. The entire
On 19 April 2012 14:03, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 1:41 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 April 2012 12:31, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com
No it isn't exactly the same for people and companies. Wikipedia has a
whole bunch of editors whose hobby includes protecting BLPs, we don't have
similar editors who genuinely care about the reputation of companies. Or if
we do they aren't in the same numbers.
Also if PR people are skewed towards
On 19 April 2012 15:38, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 April 2012 15:34, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Those people, who do not have WP's
best interests at heart, are always arguing for a disconnect between the
letter and spirit of policy, because
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Ken Arromdee arrom...@rahul.net wrote:
If anything, it's worse for companies. Nobody tells BLP subjects that
because they have a COI, they can't even remove incorrect statements
about themselves.
A fair point.
I liked Andreas's way of putting this earlier:
On 19 April 2012 16:01, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
I liked Andreas's way of putting this earlier:
Positive bias and advertorials *can* be odious, but activist editing with a
negative bent has traditionally been the greater problem in Wikipedia, in
my view, and is the type of
On Conservapedia, a parodist came up with this template:
http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template%3ANohearsayaction=historysubmitdiff=976114oldid=976104
Mr Schlafly approves:
http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:CPalmercurid=72836diff=976121oldid=975547
- d.
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 6:21 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
Mr Schlafly approves:
http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:CPalmercurid=72836diff=976121oldid=975547
Poe's law lives!
--
gwern
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
Conservapedia aren't a competitor. They aren't in remotely the same
business as us.
On Apr 19, 2012 11:22 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On Conservapedia, a parodist came up with this template:
On 20 April 2012 00:36, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Apr 19, 2012 11:22 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On Conservapedia, a parodist came up with this template:
On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 9:58 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
Their article on us is great, though:
http://conservapedia.com/Wikipedia
Wow, that's awesome - the whole introduction is gold. In fact, so much
to enjoy about that article - even the effect of scandals on
Wikipedia
21 matches
Mail list logo
