QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Fri 18th July 2008, 5:25pm)
QUOTE(Robert Roberts @ Fri 18th July 2008, 4:46pm)
I've come across him a few times, he's a tool - he's not particular interested in "truth", he's interested in pissing off Muslim editors. He's a troll.
Yes but it's still a fact- why hide it unless others have an agenda.
Goldy- thark was banned for a fortnight in jan or something, since then he's been back and had to behave a bit around the muhammad article. I thought he was risking being blocked over the recent Bardy reverts to be honest. How he behaves over Irish, Islam and so on articles merely reflects the perspective of a lot of English people or people worldwide who don't have a POV pushing pro-Irish republican agenda, and our views are not necessarily represented on those articles due to the high numbers of Irish or pro- Irish editing on there. Not that I'm anti-Irish, just saying at the current time there's not many people representing the views Thark is trying to make sure are including in these articles, and he's not alone in holding these views,but they've been forced out.
However, I can't claim to be unbiased, that's why I'm not going to chip in much on any Arbcom etc about it from now on- or I will make sure I let my own allegiances be known.
The reason being that Thark is a personal friend of mine in real life, and we're meeting him for drinks on Sunday for social or reasons largely unrelated to wiki, but which will include a great deal of celebration. (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)
And why is Churchill being protected from similar by British Nationalists? Actually Thark was one of my favourite editors on WP, and he doesn't hide his pro-British pov under a bushel, he so much reminds me of some of my English cousins in many ways. Didn't realise the block was for two weeks, and personally I'd be more in favour of a topic-ban for two weeks. I once told him that I could easily imagine him at the bottom of his garden, raising the Union Jack every morning at dawn to the sound of GodSaveTheQueen from an old gramophone record, and lowering it lovingly, each evening at dusk.
I will differ from you about your general thrust here, Wikipedia is top heavy with pro-British editors, pushing a British pov. It's not a conspiracy theory, as those same editors don't even realise that they are basking in their own pov. All you have to do is read the British based history articles, where there is a lot of pov. Sometimes a lone Irish editor comes along and tries to rectify a sentence about the Earl of Essex, or Cromwell and suddenly about twenty pro-British editors come out of the "woodwork", and chew the head off him, he won't go back there again! Recently there was a spate of pro-British-pov editors throlling on the Irish Famine page, an aspect I found rather disgusting. Anyway, give Thark my regards, and have a nice Sunday and weekend. (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)
The moral is that everone has their POV, and to deny that is akin denying their ones own mortality, I guess. I think the big challenge is for everyone to recognise that aspect of themselves within their own editing. (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif)