![]() |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Alex |
![]()
Post
#41
|
Back from the dead ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Regulars Posts: 1,017 Joined: Member No.: 867 ![]() |
So it's gone now. Deleted by Yanksox, speedily endorsed by our friend Gaillimh. Three cheers all round? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/cool.gif)
|
![]() ![]() |
Anonymouse |
![]()
Post
#42
|
Neophyte Group: Contributors Posts: 6 Joined: Member No.: 963 ![]() |
Someone's offering a bounty for FA status on it here.
|
Yanksox |
![]()
Post
#43
|
New Member ![]() Group: Contributors Posts: 20 Joined: Member No.: 1,014 ![]() |
I'm just stunned. This is a classic case of group think. |
Anonymouse |
![]()
Post
#44
|
Neophyte Group: Contributors Posts: 6 Joined: Member No.: 963 ![]() |
I'm just stunned. This is a classic case of group think. FULL DISCLOSURE: I AM INDEED abeg92. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ph34r.gif) I posted the bounty because I believe that his criticisms of Wikipedia are intellectually dishonest. There are legitimate grounds for disagreement with WP. Mr. Brandt's website contains none. |
Somey |
![]()
Post
#45
|
Can't actually moderate (or even post) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Moderators Posts: 11,816 Joined: From: Dreamland Member No.: 275 ![]() |
FULL DISCLOSURE: I AM INDEED abeg92. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ph34r.gif) Really? Wow, this is too much drama for one evening... (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)QUOTE I posted the bounty because I believe that his criticisms of Wikipedia are intellectually dishonest. There are legitimate grounds for disagreement with WP. Mr. Brandt's website contains none. That makes no sense, though. What does intellectual dishonesty have to do with anything? Are you saying he really does want a biographical article on WP about him that anyone can vandalize to their heart's content? Or, rather, it simply reinforces my earlier, uh, implication, which is that you and various other WP'ers are doing this primarily, if not only, for revenge. Oh well, it's just five bucks... |
Anonymouse |
![]()
Post
#46
|
Neophyte Group: Contributors Posts: 6 Joined: Member No.: 963 ![]() |
FULL DISCLOSURE: I AM INDEED abeg92. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ph34r.gif) Really? Wow, this is too much drama for one evening... (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)QUOTE I posted the bounty because I believe that his criticisms of Wikipedia are intellectually dishonest. There are legitimate grounds for disagreement with WP. Mr. Brandt's website contains none. That makes no sense, though. What does intellectual dishonesty have to do with anything? Are you saying he really does want a biographical article on WP about him that anyone can vandalize to their heart's content? Or, rather, it simply reinforces my earlier, uh, implication, which is that you and various other WP'ers are doing this primarily, if not only, for revenge. Oh well, it's just five bucks... I voted keep for one reason and posted the bounty for another. I voted keep because of the ungodly huge list of sources on the talk page of the AfD debate, which, in my opinion, established not only verifiability but notability, (which, by the way is not a policy). I posted the bounty for an unrelated reason; I believe Brandt's arguments are dishonest. People post them for random/personal reasons; take a look at [[WP:BOUNTY]]. Thank you. |
Somey |
![]()
Post
#47
|
Can't actually moderate (or even post) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Moderators Posts: 11,816 Joined: From: Dreamland Member No.: 275 ![]() |
I voted keep because of the ungodly huge list of sources on the talk page of the AfD debate, which, in my opinion, established not only verifiability but notability, (which, by the way is not a policy). Well then, the usual counter-argument: Who cares about one man's supposed "notability" when the fate of the world's largest online compendium of human knowledge is at stake? (Putting aside the risk to our entire modern conception of personal privacy, just for the moment?) QUOTE I posted the bounty for an unrelated reason; I believe Brandt's arguments are dishonest. Okay, but what arguments are dishonest? And how are they dishonest? Are you saying that Wikipedia doesn't show up on the first page of most Google searches? Or that Wikipedia isn't "scraped" by hundreds of other websites as a cheap means of obtaining advertising revenue? Are you saying that most admins there aren't anonymous? Or that people don't use blog postings as reference sources in BLP articles? Or are you just saying his version of the events that led WP to the current impasse are inaccurate in some way? Do what you want, of course, but it isn't enough to say "his arguments are dishonest," at least without something to back it up. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: |