well, they did not revdel it. arbcom can drive the discussion off wiki, but cannot ban the Guardian for "bad journalism" certain account behaviors are being favored you should expect to see a lot more of those behaviors in the future
this will necessitate a lot of wiki-splaining thank-you arbcom for firing up every up coming feminist editathon you may not care how how you are perceived, but the negative blowback will tarnish all of wikimedia On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 12:06 AM, Ryan Kaldari <rkald...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > The rediculous thing is that none of the people defending that article > were 'feminists'. They were just defending the mainstream point of view > from an endless onslaught of 8channers. The feminist point view isn't even > represented in the article. > > On Jan 23, 2015, at 7:14 PM, J Hayes <slowki...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/23/wikipedia-bans-editors-from-gender-related-articles-amid-gamergate-controversy > > > http://internet.gawker.com/wikipedia-purged-a-group-of-feminist-editors-because-of-1681463331/+cushac > > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org > To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please > visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap > > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org > To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please > visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap