The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

Reply to this topicStart new topic
> ArbCom appeal of MONGO statements, Must Signpost be wimpy forever?
Daniel Brandt
post Sun 29th April 2007, 1:23am
Post #1


Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,473
Joined: Fri 24th Mar 2006, 12:23am
Member No.: 77


To: Newyorkbrad
Arbitration Committee Clerk
April 28, 2007

Dear Arbitration Committee:

I wish to appeal to the Arbitration Committee for a clarification
of two statements made by the ArbCom in the MONGO decision of

Outing sites as attack sites

11) A website that engages in the practice of publishing private
information concerning the identities of Wikipedia participants
will be regarded as an attack site whose pages should not be linked
to from Wikipedia pages under any circumstances.
Pass 6-0 at 02:08, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Links to attack site

3) Links to attack sites may be removed by any user; such removals
are exempt from 3RR. Deliberately linking to an attack site may be
grounds for blocking.
Pass 5-0-1 at 02:08, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I have standing to file this appeal because these statements formed
the basis of a decision by founder and reporter Michael Snow of The
Signpost, and confirmed by editor Ral315, to delete a link to in the 2007-04-23 article titled, "Wales
unblocks Brandt, then reverses himself."

Initially Mr. Snow linked to the Wikipedia-watch home page in his
article. At that time, the site did not even host hivemind.html or
hive2.html, two pages that exposed the identities of some editors
and administrators. However, two editors summarily deleted the
link, one of whom, Musical_Linguist, persisted despite two
reversions by SqueakBox. This made a mockery of Mr. Snow's claim to
me in an email on 2007-02-28: "... as unlike Wikipedia generally
the Signpost has a policy of using bylines and allowing the
reporter to have final authority over the content."

In the end, Musical_Linguist's deletion of the link was sustained
after she cited the above two sentences from the MONGO decision.
This apparently intimidated Michael Snow and Ral315 sufficiently,
so that they let the deletion stand. When it became clear that
the nonexistence of hivemind and hive2 on the site was not relevant
at all, I announced that hive2 would be restored in 24 hours if the
link was not put back by then.

1. I cannot believe that the ArbCom uses the word "site" advisedly
in these two sentences, when what is probably meant is the word
"page." If the word "site" is enforced, then I maintain that the
New York Times shall not be linked, because it revealed the name of
anonymous editor Brian Chase on 2005-12-11. And The New Yorker
magazine must not be linked, because it revealed the name of Ryan
Jordan, aka Essjay, on 2007-02-26. Hundreds of publications around
the world repeated this information. They are all "attack sites" by
the ArbCom's definition. Instead of "site" the two sentences above
should read "page."

2. There has been a major debate on Wikipedia, and on the WikiEN-l
mailing list, about whether the ArbCom statements above should be
interpreted as "policy" or whether they apply only to the MONGO
case, and fall short of general "policy." ArbCom owes it to
Wikipedia to clarify the scope of its jurisdiction in cases such
as the MONGO case. Knowing that various Wikipedians will seek to
exploit any ill-chosen language of any decision by ArbCom as a
mandate for summary enforcement, clarification is necessary to
prevent future incidents such as the one with Wikipedia-watch and
The Signpost.

I ask that the ArbCom take up this appeal because it has major
implications for the ArbCom's confused role within Wikipedia
generally, and for the alleged independence of The Signpost in

Thank you,
Daniel Brandt
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Mon 30th April 2007, 9:04pm
Post #2

gabba gabba hey

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,071
Joined: Mon 2nd Apr 2007, 6:27pm
From: BADCITY, Iowa
Member No.: 1,223

no answer yet, I'm assuming?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Sun 10th August 2008, 5:25pm
Post #3

Quickly running out of Cache

Group: Contributors
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun 5th Aug 2007, 3:56am
Member No.: 2,249

WP user page - talk
check - contribs

QUOTE(BobbyBombastic @ Mon 30th April 2007, 9:04pm) *

no answer yet, I'm assuming?

I imagine the response is, "Hey, look, it's from Daniel Brandt. tl;dr."
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th 4 14, 4:45am