On 20 August 2010 16:54, Amir E. Aharoni <[email protected]> wrote:
> The whole thing is a non-issue. It has already been discussed on Foundation-l > : > http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-August/060582.html As I said there: ==== Despite the media attention, I don't think the integrity of the encyclopedias' content is in any danger at all, and I don't think this is any sort of special case of activist attention. Wikipedia gets waves of activists and is used to dealing with them. The ones who don't take the time to understand Neutral Point Of View, their stuff gets removed. The ones who do, their stuff stays and their cause gets accurately described and represented. Best case, we get more good new Wikipedians. This applies to any activist for any cause whatsoever and has applied at least since I started on en:wp in 2004. The advice I have for activists is: strict neutrality with excellent citations will do your cause justice. Everything else will be removed. The broader advice is: there is no plausible attack on the integrity of the encyclopedias themselves that is not already something we are quite used to dealing with on a daily basis for many years :-) ==== That said, it's interesting to see the media interest. People care a *lot* about the integrity of Wikipedia. Which is nice, since we do too. - d. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
