Re: [WikiEN-l] The Curious Incident of the Fans in the Night
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, David Gerard wrote: > If they want to filibuster the reliability of this source, it speaks > of some child being Robert Heinlein's great-grandson ... Heinlein > didn't have any children. I wonder where they got that from. Wikipedia's article on Heinlein nowhere says he didn't have any children. It's generally accepted that he and Virginia didn't have any children, but Virginia was his third wife, and he was married to his second for 15 years. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google bows to censorship
On 17 Jan 2010 09:13:08, Fred Bauder wrote: > > I'm so torn. On the one hand, the hypocrisy is blinding - filtering > > its search results is exactly what Google was doing in China. On the > > other hand, it's Encyclopedia Dramatica... > > > > -- > > gwern > > Oh, they're cool; shine it on... > > Fred Bauder But they're just implementing your brilliant ArbCom decision of a few years ago, which launched the BADSITES Wars! -- == Dan == Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/ Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/ Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/ ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] The Curious Incident of the Fans in the Night
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > 2010/1/18 quiddity : >> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Ken Arromdee wrote: >> ... >>> elsewhere. Our rules generally don't say we can't use information unless >>> it has *two* sources; and in this case it's obvious that the reason the >>> information is hard to find is that Neil Gaiman is trying to keep it quiet, >>> not that it isn't true. >>> >> >> Unless there's a [[Template:Notable_Wikipedian]] tag missing from the >> article's talkpage, >> I suspect you probably mean "Neil Gaiman's /fans are/ trying to keep >> it quiet". Not neilhimself...! > > The information is difficult to find in reliable sources - most of > those are not edited by fans. > Ahh, Ken was talking about the sources themselves. I was concentrating on the "removed from his Wikipedia page by the site’s editors" quotation from the article, and completely misunderstood what Ken meant. Apologies. quiddity ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] The Curious Incident of the Fans in the Night
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 6:21 PM, David Gerard wrote: > 2010/1/18 Ken Arromdee : > >> The problem is that Wikipedia policies pretty much encourage editors to >> filibuster changes they don't like by demanding sources and questioning the >> sources. This is useful when there's a serious question about whether the >> information is accurate, but it's also abused when there's no serious >> question >> about the information's accuracy and the request for sources is used to block >> something they want to exclude for other reasons. If someone then provides a >> valid source anyway, the source just gets repeatedly questioned regardles of >> whether it follows Wikipedia's sourcing rules. > > > If they want to filibuster the reliability of this source, it speaks > of some child being Robert Heinlein's great-grandson ... Heinlein > didn't have any children. I wonder where they got that from. > > > - d. After some checking, it seems he really didn't have any offspring. But he had quite a few siblings, so I am going to tentatively assume that http://www.cheryl-morgan.com/?p=7536 is right and what was meant was great-grandnephew. They might've simply asked the kid and gotten that response; I remember when I was that age & younger I was none too clear on the whole genealogical tree and who was nephew to whom. But hopefully someone will contact the article writer and get it straightened out. -- gwern ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] The Curious Incident of the Fans in the Night
2010/1/18 Ken Arromdee : > The problem is that Wikipedia policies pretty much encourage editors to > filibuster changes they don't like by demanding sources and questioning the > sources. This is useful when there's a serious question about whether the > information is accurate, but it's also abused when there's no serious question > about the information's accuracy and the request for sources is used to block > something they want to exclude for other reasons. If someone then provides a > valid source anyway, the source just gets repeatedly questioned regardles of > whether it follows Wikipedia's sourcing rules. If they want to filibuster the reliability of this source, it speaks of some child being Robert Heinlein's great-grandson ... Heinlein didn't have any children. I wonder where they got that from. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] The Curious Incident of the Fans in the Night
2010/1/18 Gwern Branwen : > Did you know there's not one single use of the term 'Scientology' on > neilgaiman.com or any subdomains? Given his family is Scientologist, > he was raised a Scientologist in a major bastion of Scientology, > married a Scientologist, and so on, and given that people have been > interested in all the foregoing for a long time, and also given that > he used to have comments on the website, and *also* given that he is > historically very responsive to random questions about just about > anything* - the utter silence must be deliberate. Which is as one > would expect. This is not uncommon amongst second-generation Scientologists who aren't into it. I am *amazed* he talked about it for the New Yorker. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google bows to censorship
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Gwern Branwen wrote: > > Google has agreed to take down links to a website that promotes racist > views of indigenous Australians. > > Aboriginal man Steve Hodder-Watt recently discovered the US-based site by > searching "Aboriginal and Encyclopedia" in the search engine. > > He tried to modify the entry on Encyclopedia Dramatica, a satirical and > extremely racist version of Wikipedia, but was blocked from doing so. > ... > > Mr Newhouse said Google agreed to take the link down after he filed an > official complaint to the Australian Human Rights Commission. > > "Lo and behold they agreed last night to take down the sites." > > > http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/google-agrees-to-take-down-racist-site-20100115-maxd.html > > I'm so torn. On the one hand, the hypocrisy is blinding - filtering > its search results is exactly what Google was doing in China. On the > other hand, it's Encyclopedia Dramatica... > If censoring some things (like "the most offensive sorts of racial vilification you could possibly find"), and refusing to censor other things (like an historical account of a pro-democracy demonstration), is hypocrisy, then let me be the first to say that I'm in favor of hypocrisy. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] The Curious Incident of the Fans in the Night
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 5:29 PM, quiddity wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Ken Arromdee wrote: > ... >> elsewhere. Our rules generally don't say we can't use information unless >> it has *two* sources; and in this case it's obvious that the reason the >> information is hard to find is that Neil Gaiman is trying to keep it quiet, >> not that it isn't true. >> > > Unless there's a [[Template:Notable_Wikipedian]] tag missing from the > article's talkpage, > I suspect you probably mean "Neil Gaiman's /fans are/ trying to keep > it quiet". Not neilhimself...! > > quiddity. No, I think he meant Neil. Did you know there's not one single use of the term 'Scientology' on neilgaiman.com or any subdomains? Given his family is Scientologist, he was raised a Scientologist in a major bastion of Scientology, married a Scientologist, and so on, and given that people have been interested in all the foregoing for a long time, and also given that he used to have comments on the website, and *also* given that he is historically very responsive to random questions about just about anything* - the utter silence must be deliberate. Which is as one would expect. * I know this from personal experience: http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2004/09/from-mailbag-er-i-won-huck.asp -- gwern ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] The Curious Incident of the Fans in the Night
2010/1/18 quiddity : > On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Ken Arromdee wrote: > ... >> elsewhere. Our rules generally don't say we can't use information unless >> it has *two* sources; and in this case it's obvious that the reason the >> information is hard to find is that Neil Gaiman is trying to keep it quiet, >> not that it isn't true. >> > > Unless there's a [[Template:Notable_Wikipedian]] tag missing from the > article's talkpage, > I suspect you probably mean "Neil Gaiman's /fans are/ trying to keep > it quiet". Not neilhimself...! The information is difficult to find in reliable sources - most of those are not edited by fans. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] The Curious Incident of the Fans in the Night
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Ken Arromdee wrote: ... > elsewhere. Our rules generally don't say we can't use information unless > it has *two* sources; and in this case it's obvious that the reason the > information is hard to find is that Neil Gaiman is trying to keep it quiet, > not that it isn't true. > Unless there's a [[Template:Notable_Wikipedian]] tag missing from the article's talkpage, I suspect you probably mean "Neil Gaiman's /fans are/ trying to keep it quiet". Not neilhimself...! quiddity. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] The Curious Incident of the Fans in the Night
The problem is that Wikipedia policies pretty much encourage editors to filibuster changes they don't like by demanding sources and questioning the sources. This is useful when there's a serious question about whether the information is accurate, but it's also abused when there's no serious question about the information's accuracy and the request for sources is used to block something they want to exclude for other reasons. If someone then provides a valid source anyway, the source just gets repeatedly questioned regardles of whether it follows Wikipedia's sourcing rules. It looks like that's what happened here. I find particularly absurd the argument that the source shouldn't count because the information isn't found elsewhere. Our rules generally don't say we can't use information unless it has *two* sources; and in this case it's obvious that the reason the information is hard to find is that Neil Gaiman is trying to keep it quiet, not that it isn't true. (I wonder if the New Yorker article now counts as a second source.) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] The Curious Incident of the Fans in the Night
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/01/25/100125fa_fact_goodyear?currentPage=all "The pivotal fact of Gaiman’s childhood is one that appears nowhere in his fiction and is periodically removed from his Wikipedia page by the site’s editors. When he was five, his family moved to East Grinstead, the center of English Scientology, where his parents began taking Dianetics classes. His father, a real-estate developer, and his mother, a pharmacist, founded a vitamin shop, G & G Foods, which is still operational. (According to its Web site, it supplies the Human Detoxification Programme, a course of vitamins, supplements, and other alleged purification techniques, which Scientology offers at disaster sites like Chernobyl and Ground Zero.) In the seventies, his father, who died last year, began working in Scientology’s public-relations wing and over time rose high in the organization. Gaiman has two younger sisters, both still active in Scientology; one of them works for the church in Los Angeles, and the other helps run the family businesses. At times, Scientology proved awkward for the Gaiman children. According to Lizzy Calcioli, the sister who stayed in England, “Most of our social activities were involved with Scientology or our Jewish family. It would get very confusing when people would ask my religion as a kid. I’d say, ‘I’m a Jewish Scientologist.’ ” Gaiman says that he was blocked from entering a boys’ school because of his father’s position and had to remain at the school he’d been attending, the only boy left in a classroom full of girls. These days, Gaiman tends to avoid questions about his faith, but says he is not a Scientologist. Like Judaism, Scientology is the religion of his family, and he feels some solidarity with them. “I will stand with groups when I feel like they’re being properly persecuted,” he told me." It is entertaining to read the relevant talk page sections: * https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Talk:Neil_Gaiman#Neil_Gaiman_is_not_a_Scientologist * https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Talk:Neil_Gaiman/Archive1#Scientology * https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Talk:Neil_Gaiman/Archive1#Possible_reference_found -- gwern ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google bows to censorship
To be honest I don't totally see it as hypocrisy, inconsistent? Perhaps a bit, I actually saw the Google statement as less "we don't support censorship" and more of a "you broke the implicit (or explicit I don't know) agreement. I think the biggest thing was that Google thought that if we were working with China and going along with their filtering they should be leaving us alone. Instead they decided to attack us and therefore we can no longer trust them. User:Jamesofur James Alexander james.alexan...@rochester.edu Wiki:jameso...@gmail.com 100 gmail invites and no one to give them to :( let me know if you want one :) On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Christopher Grant < chrisgrantm...@gmail.com> wrote: > (from smh article) > >Mr Newhouse believes the site would be filtered under the Federal > Government's mandatory filter. > > The plot thickens... Sure their articles racist and are basically designed > offend everyone, however I personally don't feel conformable with the > government being able to block a site like ED. > > -- Chris > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 7:07 AM, Gwern Branwen wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Anthony wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Anthony wrote: > > >> If censoring some things (like "the most offensive sorts of racial > > >> vilification you could possibly find"), and refusing to censor other > > things > > >> (like an historical account of a pro-democracy demonstration), is > > hypocrisy, > > >> then let me be the first to say that I'm in favor of hypocrisy. > > > > Silly Anthony. Don't you know that China was simply asking Google to > > comply with local laws against morals-destroying smut, the propaganda > > of life-destroying evil cults, and the subversion of mass-murdering > > terrorists? > > > > What's some peculiar racist humor compared with *that*? Strange moral > > standards you have there. > > > > > But then, treating one country differently from another country is not > > > hypocrisy. Treating one situation differently from another situation > is > > not > > > hypocrisy. Looking at the relevant part of the Google statement, it > was > > > this: "We have decided we are no longer willing to continue censoring > our > > > results on Google.cn, and so over the next few weeks we will be > > discussing > > > with the Chinese government the basis on which we could operate an > > > unfiltered search engine within the law, if at all." > > > http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-approach-to-china.html > > > > > > It was a statement specifically about the Chinese government, and about > > > results on google.cn. Google did not claim or even imply that it was > > > stopping all censorship altogether. So I don't see the hypocrisy. > > > > It is, at the very least, inconsistent. One set of rules for the > > Chinese (and the world), and another set for the Australians. What > > difference is there between the 2 situations that justifies this? If > > there is no difference, then it's a plain contradiction. (Oh, you > > happen to agree with one and not the other? I see...) > > > > -- > > gwern > > > > ___ > > WikiEN-l mailing list > > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
