Links to MyWikBiz, Summa Logicae Options

[Peter Damian]

I raised the issue on the RS noticeboard here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Rel...WikiBiz_deleted

There is a concerted effort to remove a link on the Summa Logicae article to a version of book III (the only version on the internet) I placed there.

The logic is that it is a 'personal website'. As I have pointed out, that logic would remove 90% of links from medieval articles, and nearly all the links on that particular article.

It was many weeks work to check the scanned in Latin version - there are currently no Latin spell-checkers on the market, and it all has to be done by eye. This seems more a vendetta against Kohs than anything else.

[Abd]

Okay, I posted it., permanent link.

I see that my edit on the Wikipedia article was reverted by someone named Mr. Ollie, I assume that nobody here will be shocked to hear that, but I'm a little offended that Mr. Ollie ignored my polite request that he explain the revert in Talk. Sooner or later he will surely stub his toe and my laugh will haunt him.

All hell appears to have broken loose. My my, all that fuss over a effing external link. I have a feeling that there is one or more of these people just itching to be blocked, or, what is more painful, for, not being blocked, the community to chew them up and spit them out.

WikiuserNI seems to be a class A jerk. This is the one who -- very incorrectly -- seemed to think that external links need to be "reliable source." And then he rejected a reasonably polite request on his Talk, and promptly yanked the link, with a totally wrong-headed and backwards edit summary.

For this type of Wikipediot, "banned editor" means that they would erase the name from history if they could, and benefit to the readers means absolutely nothing. If you are banned, you must be a Very Bad Person, and any web site that would host your crap probably hosts browser viruses, copyright violations, and child pornography.

However, at the moment, it looks like some kind of sanity is prevailing. It happens at Wikipedia from time to time.

As usual, when someone comes in and makes sensible edits in a way that a banned editor did, there is a claim of sock puppetry. However, the heavy lifting is being done by Skomorokh, no lightweight. 51,000 live edits. Think he can handle the situation?

Meanwhile, Mr. Ollie took time from his busy day pouring over Recent Changes to user-page tag The Man On The Clapham Omnibus, as a suspected sock puppet of Peter. But he didn't take the time to actually file an investigation, and, my guess, it's pretty thin. But, then again, you never know, or, maybe, it's who you know. Who is this Ollie jerk, anyway, his MO is pretty familiar, but, then again, if you've seen one asshole, you've seen them all. Maybe Ollie would disagree with me on that.

I'd have removed that tag in better days, but, while that MYOB ban is still in place, I'm sure I'd get nailed for it. I'm saving getting nailed for better purposes, like, saving the whole of humanity or something like that....

One of these days, Peter, you ought to look at self-reversion. It can really drive someone like Mr. Ollie up the wall if you self-revert, leaving him completely powerless. You can self-revert any edit to any article that isn't semi'd, and it would be astonishing if the RfPP admins would consider that any kind of a problem at all. "Why don't you just ignore it, Mr. Ollie?" "But, other editors are restoring the edits!" "Okay, Mr. Ollie, and the problem with that is?"

"But he's banned! He shouldn't be doing this!" "Mr. Ollie, get over it. Perhaps you need to take a break."