QUOTE(Gold heart @ Fri 18th July 2008, 6:35pm)
And why is Churchill being protected from similar by British Nationalists?
That's the way it goes on Wikipedia, most of the articles have a degree of WP:OWN by one 'side' or the other of an argument. Such as pro- or anti- a particular cult or whatever.
QUOTE
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 think/know he enjoys the arguments greatly, he's rarely upset by it and finds the completely, to him, outlandish views of for instance G2Bambino and various other editors on articles about the royals etc. hilarious. Unless someone has really strong views about these issues, some people would admit to finding his antics sort of funny in a way, perhaps, in as much as they are shocked as they're not "politically correct," and people like to sometimes have a break from political correctness. even if t's not with something that's identical to their own viewpoint. As you say about your cousins, he's not the only one in England/ the UK in particular with these views. He is not as posh or outmoded as to have a flag, or sing god save the queen etc. I'd imagine him more as the average bloke down the pub but with a bit more intellect, who enjoys a good row or mock of people over his pint.
QUOTE
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.
I've not seen any other than tharky, but it's not my particular subject area so I only read the rows he's involved in as a friend, so I only see the mad-keen ones he's debating with, such as G2Bambino. I don't know if you know of G2Bambino's edits, but he has a thing about Canada and some minutiae of terminology about the status of the Queen there. While technically true, they seem bizarre at first glance and Thark obviously enjoys arguing about them.
QUOTE
Recently there was a spate of pro-British-pov editors throlling on the Irish Famine page, an aspect I found rather disgusting.
I don't know much about the article, except it's not even called 'Irish potato famine' is it, which is what everyone/the media in the UK refer to it as. Isn't it the one that's randomly called 'the great hunger'?
QUOTE
Anyway, give Thark my regards, and have a nice Sunday and weekend. (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)
I wil, and you. Do you know any WP editors in real life? There seem not to be that many of us in a town, either that or people are too ashamed too admit it. (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)
QUOTE
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)
True but people, especially perhaps some of "The Cabal" are mad keen to deny they have a bias and assert that their interpretation of an issue is The Truth. Of course with a lot of academic subjects nowadays, such as anthropology etc, I would say that stuudents are encouraged to be aware of their own bias.
Then of course, those with a viewpoint different from that of the upper eschelons on wiki probably end up being blocked if they're too vocal about it.
As to a topic ban- Thark was explicitly warned that it was perceived misbehaviour on the Muhammad article that would lead to further blocks. Topic bans tend to be used less often than blocks in general, because they usually need more discussion or Arbcom rather than one admin just 'sorting it out' on their own with a block.
I keep fearing that some of this will end with an Arbcom... but despite appearances with the Bardy issue, things are actually more amicable now on some of the articles about the royals etc. I think User:GoodDay or whatever he's called is a calming presence.
This post has been edited by wikiwhistle: