[[Essjay controversy]] up for Featured Article, Hold the main page! Options

[Firsfron of Ronchester]

Essjay controversy has been nominated for Featured Article, articles which are supposed to represent the best of Wikipedia. Featured Articles may appear on Wikipedia's Main Page. Is this navel gazing? Or is it important for Wikipedia to air its own dirty laundry on its front page?

[Jonny Cache]

Essjay controversy has been nominated for Featured Article, articles which are supposed to represent the best of Wikipedia. Featured Articles may appear on Wikipedia's Main Page. Is this navel gazing? Or is it important for Wikipedia to air its own dirty laundry on its front page?

Please look up Fundamental Attribution Bias (FAB), aka Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE) in a social psych textbook. The Wikipedia article used to be moderately informative on this score when I was helping to write it, but I never look bak NE more, as it always makes me cry.

It doesn't really matter if WP:Fundament Gazing is done on its front page or in its back wards, as it's all the same thing, a way of distracting from the ®eal Problem™ @ Wikipedia.

IT'S THE SYSTEM, STØØPID !!!

Jonny

[Kato]

The nomination is priceless

The controversy itself is now over, and the edit wars are now finished. What is left is very comprehensive and concise article that I think is now good enough for FA. Let something good come out of something bad. DevAlt 09:06, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I have a feeling that Raul won't ever put it on the front page. As he is somehow in a position to control the process unilaterally, he'll see it for what it is. A disaster.

[blissyu2]

Bizarre. Much as it might be fun to have that on Wikipedia's front page, its wrong on so many levels to do that.

[Pwok]

I wouldn't be surprised if it went on their front page. It is not an example of airing one's dirty laundry; it is an example of applying lipstick to a pig. The "Essjay controversy" article is a prime example of Wikipedia's lack of respect for the truth. It brushes aside the most salient fact: Jimmy Wales knew that Jordan was a fraud and hired him anyway, and kept him in his senior position at Wikipedia anyway. This central issue is dealt with only tangentially and incompletely in the article, which is revealingly labeled as being about a "controversy" rather being about the "fraud" it that it was.

Yes, Wikipedia, put your fraudulent article on the fraudulent front page of your fraudulent encyclopedia. You are frauds who deserve to be known as frauds. Your article is Exhibit A. You fool no one.

This post has been edited by Pwok: Sat 1st September 2007, 5:42pm

[guy]

Articles on the front page always get floods of edits of course. Can you imagine what would happen to that article?

[Jonny Cache]

Articles on the front page always get floods of edits of course. Can you imagine what would happen to that article?

Fly, Flypaper.
Flypaper, Fly.

Lordy, Lordy !!!

Jonny

[everyking]

FAs aren't just about going on the front page, you know. An FA doesn't have to go on the front page at all. I would say that this one shouldn't, but that also shouldn't keep it from being an FA.

[Jonny Cache]

FAs aren't just about going on the front page, you know. An FA doesn't have to go on the front page at all. I would say that this one shouldn't, but that also shouldn't keep it from being an FA.

Last time I looked, there's a "Featured Content" link on the Main Page and every other page.

Jonny

[Jaranda]

Of course he'll never put that in the main page, for obvious reasons.

[Firsfron of Ronchester]

FAs aren't just about going on the front page, you know. An FA doesn't have to go on the front page at all.

That's true; I actually doubt it would ever be accepted for the Main Page even if it passes FA. And so far, both reviewers have objected.

I think even the title is a little too Wikipedia-centered. I think this article had a more neutral title when it was named Essjay scandal, because the event was really only controversial on Wikipedia itself; few (if any) sources are disputing that Ryan Jordan used false credentials while editing Wikipedia, during content disputes, and to the press. Few people outside of Wikipedia would argue that Essjay was justified in making false claims to the press or during edit disputes, so the "controversy" exists only on Wikipedia. Elsewhere it's pretty much a scandal.

The thing is: I'm not sure this article could ever meet the Featured Article requirements, even with a completely objective editor (if one exists). FAs are supposed to be articles of a quality better than that of existing encyclopedias. Since no other encyclopedia is going to have an article about Essjay, there's no way to objectively measure this article against existing encyclopedia articles.

[jdrand]

The reason why WJBscribe voted oppose is not because the article is self referential and "obsessed with itself", but because Wikipedia's ruling Class Clique (RCC) wants to diminish criticism of itself. Even though the article is very well qritten and the case received mass media coverage, and worthy of featured article status, it still will not pass because the reason for the oppose votes are not really the reason for the oppose votes.

[Pwok]

WJBscribe voted "no" because he was one of Jordan's advocates. WJBscribe was pro-fraud. It speaks volumes of Wikipedia, not to mention WJBscribe, that he is still there, ruling on articles.

[blissyu2]

WJBscribe helped to ban Malber. He is a good guy.

[Pwok]

He's a good guy. That speaks volumes: it tells me that, yes, Wikipedia is not only hollow at the core but it's run by a bunch of kids who confuse composing accurate articles with voting for student council president. It shouldn't be a popularity contest. Fact is, this WJBscribe character has been editing facts out of articles and has been promoting and defending fraudulent people. I doesn't matter whether he's a "good guy." He doesn't belong in a position of responsibility at an "encyclopdia."

[Unrepentant Vandal]

He doesn't belong in a position of responsibility at an "encyclopdia."

Luckily, Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia.

[Pwok]

Luckily, Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia.

They make that claim.

[Unrepentant Vandal]

Luckily, Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia.

They make that claim.

And North Korea claims to be a democracy.

[Pwok]

Look, I don't believe the claim either. The fact that this WJBscribe remains as an administrator is one of the many reasons why the claim is not credible.

[LamontStormstar]

WJBscribe voted "no" because he was one of Jordan's advocates. WJBscribe was pro-fraud. It speaks volumes of Wikipedia, not to mention WJBscribe, that he is still there, ruling on articles.

WJBscribe helped to ban Malber. He is a good guy.

Wikipedia wouldn't want something critical of them being featured.

WJScribe is pro-fraud. I never looked at the whole Malber story but I remember reading somewhere or another he banned Malber merely because Malber spoiled Harry Potter for him and I guess WJScribe was mad.