Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-10-25/News and notes

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Discuss this story

Mailing list dispute

It should be noted that at least one of the editors who have been arguing against Kohs' blocking on Foundation-l appears to have been a sockpuppet of himself [1], putting forth (among other arguments) that "Kohs will likely return with sockpuppets on the mailing list. He is relentless when prodded."[2]. Regards, HaeB (talk) 03:48, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tisk tisk. What an a. ResMar 20:53, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I know mailing lists have communication value, but how much real info can the foundation's mailing list support when it seems pretty much anyone can post to it? --Rocksanddirt (talk) 04:58, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not much. Regrettably, it seems the Wikimedia mailing lists have largely become a place for trolls and banned users to complain about Wikipedia; important discussions about Wikipedia are probably better had on Wikipedia itself. Robofish (talk) 17:03, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, interesting. Kohs has been a thorn in our side for years, one of those people right on the borderline of trolldom. If someone is clearly a troll, they are unanimously blocked and we move on. If they are clearly not a troll and useful to the community, there is no issue, and we move on. If they're on the borderline, we spend years debating whether or not they're a troll, a far worse result

. Stevage 12:20, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One problem is the concept of "troll" is too often stretched to mean "harsh or unpopular criticism". Not everyone believes this equivalence, but enough people do so that it's a factor in the above debates (which is not to say it's the only factor in such debates). -- Seth Finkelstein (talk) 19:55, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Godspeed, Godwin!

Whatever the background for Godwin's sudden departure (and Gardner's cryptic announcement doesn't leave much of a clue), Wikimedia is losing a man of principle, integrity and, not least, humour. Godspeed to you, sir! Lampman (talk) 16:01, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not widely known that Mike also played a critical part in the National Portrait Gallery copyright conflicts, helping me to secure representation and thereby ensure the maintenance of the PD-ART policy that has brought many important works to our articles. I wish him the best in the future. Dcoetzee 00:21, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Concur. Thank you Mike. Whatever may come you set a very high standard and fought for what Wikipedia believes in. Whoever follows will need awfully big shoes..... FT2 (Talk | email) 01:36, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]