Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 12:04 PM 12/21/2009, David Gerard wrote: > >> This is the one you were taken to arbitration over, and was the source >> of your proposal that experts be banned from editing articles on their >> expertise. >> > > Not at all, completely incorrect, even though asserted with succinct > confidence. > <snip> > (3) I did propose, not that experts be banned from editing articles > in their field of expertise, but that they be, on the one hand, > considered to have a conflict of interest in general, and thus > obligated to refrain from controversial editing *of articles*, but, > on the other hand, generally protected as to expressing expert > opinion on Talk pages. We should respect experts. WMC sometimes was > quite reasonable when it came to actual facts and finding compromise > text; the problem was when he used his administrative tools to > enforce his position. > We have moved from the "smoke without fire" assertions at the head of this thread to this "distinction without a difference".
It needs to be said, tirelessly, that we do not consider anyone to have a conflict of interest unless they are putting their other interests ahead of the encyclopedia's. (Strangely enough, in a part of the post I snipped, you were making some comments and claims about the misuse of technical language in climate change articles. You are doing precisely this shuffle in involving COI in a sense that has no necessary application to WP in this manner.) Charles _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
