Just to re-emphasis the point, in the words of the admin who blocked Desiphral:
at present there's no community consensus to block for commercial editing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Bad_news
- Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com wrote:
Andrew Turvey wrote:
- Fred Bauder wrote:
There is still a problem: He still has friends; there is probably
still
only one computer; and his friends may be interested in writing
Wikipedia
accounts for hire, a legal activity, as he points out. We might have
to
sort some of this stuff
Fred Bauder wrote:
And people with shared computers will continue to engage in these minor
faults. So what! There is no general need to make such an exaggerated
fuss about it.
Ec
The fuss is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Bad_news
Wikipedia would be so much better off if we just didn't let people edit the
content.
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 7:42 PM, Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
From: Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net
Andrew Turvey wrote:
Per the
The moral panic on this subject is irrational. Folks are scandalized
(scandalized!) by the very thought of people being paid to add articles to
Wikipedia because they might have a conflict of interest. Rspeer notes that
we've got along perfectly well with volunteers so far, presumably implying
Nathan wrote:
On the contrary, my guess is quite a few
articles about individuals and companies of mid-level fame were created by
fans, friends, associates, employees, etc. Perhaps a deep review with
WikiScanner will allow us to identify some of these suspect articles, and
delete them because
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com
As far as I know, motivation is still a bad argument at AfD. The basic
conflict of interest point is not that motives should be pure,
whatever that means, but that outside motivation should not be playing a
Nathan wrote:
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com
mailto:charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com
As far as I know, motivation is still a bad argument at AfD. The
basic
conflict of interest point is not that motives should be pure,
Looking at the blocking notice [2], there seems to be a sensible solution to
this:
You stated [1] that: Some years ago, other people I knew became interested in
my work at Wikipedia and I gladly supported them. The initial idea was that
each one should have a personal account, but in
I'm not sure how blocking someone for conduct admitted from some years
ago, that doesn't appear to have hurt anyone or caused any disruption, is
the right thing to do. That's like saying You violated 3RR in 2004, I'm
blocking you for 24 hours. If you wish to be unblocked, admit your guilt and
Nathan wrote:
I'm not sure how blocking someone for conduct admitted from some years
ago, that doesn't appear to have hurt anyone or caused any disruption, is
the right thing to do.
The account is blocked, because the problem is with the account. There
are obviously good grounds for an
Thank you for these thoughts. The suggestions of Andrew about how to make an
appeal will probably get me unblocked.
But, in the first place, I'm not sure if I was blocked correctly. I was told
in my last request for unblock that the same person and only that one
person may press the keys on the
- Desiphral desiph...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Desiphral desiph...@gmail.com
To: charles r matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com, English
Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Thursday, 9 July, 2009 20:49:28 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland,
Portugal
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l]
Put simply, because there was an ongoing issue with a compromised account. A
user was allowing other people to share his account, and had not agreed to stop
doing this. That is an ongoing problem and rightly deserved a block.
Of course if the user later agreed to stop doing this, the rationale
Put simply, because there was an ongoing issue with a compromised
account. A user was allowing other people to share his account, and had
not agreed to stop doing this. That is an ongoing problem and rightly
deserved a block.
Of course if the user later agreed to stop doing this, the
- Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
From: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
There is still a problem: He still has friends; there is probably still
only one computer; and his friends may be interested in writing Wikipedia
accounts for hire, a legal activity, as he points out.
I agreed as I knew about it, I said they will stay away from it (without
knowing about this policy, just for avoiding accusations of association) and
I changed my password. If it's about the present tense of I do not let
'arbitrary' people use my account, even less spammers, it was as a reply to
OK, I'll unblock you, and save you a step in the appeals process, to
unblock-en-l. I can see several things going on, some cultural. There is
no evidence in recent edits, checked by checkuser, that there is any
editing by others or for pay. In other words, this user has, other than
impudently
Thank you. After the unpleasant experience I went through, I wonder if there
are other people caught as collateral victims in this paid editing roundup.
Something needs to be done to prevent this. Plus that, generally, I find the
whole roundup process not addressing the issue of paid editing, just
Charles Matthews wrote:
Nathan wrote:
On the contrary, my guess is quite a few
articles about individuals and companies of mid-level fame were created by
fans, friends, associates, employees, etc. Perhaps a deep review with
WikiScanner will allow us to identify some of these suspect
Andrew Turvey wrote:
Per the policy [[WP:NOSHARE]], Sharing an account – or the password to an
account – with others is not permitted, and doing so will result in the
account being blocked.
This is worded in such an absolute way as to make the hearts of the
policy police glow. The
Andrew Turvey wrote:
- Fred Bauder wrote:
There is still a problem: He still has friends; there is probably still
only one computer; and his friends may be interested in writing Wikipedia
accounts for hire, a legal activity, as he points out. We might have to
sort some of this
22 matches
Mail list logo
