QUOTE(alan323 @ Wed 5th May 2010, 2:13pm)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Wed 5th May 2010, 2:49pm)
Its nice to see that LessHeard, Lar, and Cla (among some others) want to form their own little bully group.
Curious, given that LessHeard blocked Cla too, for continuing the (slow) edit war on that article.
The history of that article is interesting. When it was nominated for
deletion, I was actually planning on voting to delete it, because after looking at the article I thought there wasn't sufficient references to support it. After checking the
article history, however, I noticed that several of the usual suspects had been very aggressive at
removing article
content during the AfD! After checking the references, I realized that the blog had received a fair number of significant mentions in major media. So, I went and made a note of this in the AfD discussion and voted to keep. One editor then
changed his vote to "keep" and a few others also voted to keep while noting that the sources supported its notability. The AfD was then closed as a "keep."
Since then, the same suspects have been trying everything to
keep those references and sources out of the article, including
attacking the main editor, Mark Nutley, who has been defending that article. Yesterday, Mark was
blocked for an unrelated reason, copyviolations in other articles. Almost immediately, Dave Souza
blanked most of what was left of the article. Soon after, ChrisO
disappeared it completely.
Remember, earlier in this thread I explained that I think WMC's main purpose for participating in Wikipedia is to defend and support his friend Dr. Mann's hockey stick research. WMC and his editing friends
do not want this blog, the blog's author, Andrew Montford, or his book,
The Hockey Stick Illusion, mentioned in Wikipedia. If I didn't say so before, Mann and his colleagues are extremely aggressive in defending against attacks on their research. Montford is apparently beginning to be the "go to" guy on questions about the hockey stick's history by many of those who may have concerns about the veracity of Mann's methods and conclusions, and I doubt that Mann and his supporters are very happy about Montford's efforts.
Actually, according to WP's guidelines, the book and the man (Montford) probably aren't notable for inclusion at this time. I believe, however, that the blog is notable enough to have an article. Nevertheless, I believe WMC et al's plan is to get the blog and BLP articles merged into the book article, then argue that the book isn't notable and get it deleted, thus removing any mention of it all from Wikipedia. Of course, the big picture of all this is that no self-respecting encyclopedia would allow these types of ridiculous games to be taking place.
This post has been edited by Cla68: