Misplaced Pages

User talk:Jimbo Wales: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:17, 29 January 2008 view sourceJustaHulk (talk | contribs)728 edits →WikiNews is a crack whore: yup nope← Previous edit Latest revision as of 13:30, 11 January 2025 view source BusterD (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators44,963 edits →Scoop: Heritage Foundation plans to ‘identify and target’ Misplaced Pages editors: more 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{pp-sock|small=yes}}
{{Calm talk}}
{{pp-move|small=yes}}
{{usercomment}}
{{noindex}}
</div>
{{Stb}}
{{Usercomment}}
{{#ifeq:{{PROTECTIONLEVEL:edit}}|autoconfirmed|}}
{{Notice|1={{Center|1='''Jimbo welcomes your comments and updates – he has an ].'''<br />
'''He holds the founder's seat on the ]'s .<br />The current ] occupying "community-selected" seats are ], ], ] and ].<br />The Wikimedia Foundation's Lead Manager of Trust and Safety is ].'''}}}}
{{Notice|1={{Center|1='''This page is ] and you will not be able to leave a message here unless you are a registered editor. Instead, <br> ] '''}}}}
{{Talk header|search=yes}}
{{Misplaced Pages:TPS/banner}}
{{annual readership}}
{{Press
| subject = talkpage
| author = Matthew Gault
| title = Misplaced Pages Editors Very Mad About Jimmy Wales' NFT of a Misplaced Pages Edit
| org = ]
| url = https://www.vice.com/en/article/qjbkvm/wikipedia-editors-very-mad-about-jimmy-waless-nft-of-a-wikipedia-edit
| date = 8 December 2021
| quote = The trouble began when Wales posted an announcement about the auction on his user talk page—a kind of message board where users communicate directly with each other.
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo = old(10d)
|maxarchivesize = 250K
| archive = User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive %(counter)d
|counter = 32
| counter = 252
|algo = old(2d)
| maxarchivesize = 350K
|archive = User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive %(counter)d
| archiveheader = {{aan}}
| minthreadstoarchive = 1
| minthreadsleft = 3
}} }}
{{Centralized discussion}}
{{AutoArchivingNotice|small=yes|age=2|target=./Archive 32|dounreplied=yes|index=./Archive index|bot=MiszaBot III}}
__TOC__
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive index|mask=User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive <#>|indexhere=nein|template=User:Jimbo Wales/indextemplate}}
{{-}}
{{archives|small=yes}}

== ] ==

For posterity:
*
*]



== Boy Scouts are for spanking? ==

Mr. Wales, it may be time for you to either pay more attention to what's happening with this Misplaced Pages/Wikia relationship, or begin setting down some rules at Wikia along the lines of, "Don't embarrass Wikia or the Misplaced Pages project with your actions on Wikia or Misplaced Pages." You'll wonder what I'm talking about? I'm delighted to see that Misplaced Pages has a GFDL image of involved in the Boy Scouts mission. I'm not so delighted to see that photo a Wikia called "'''Spanking Art'''", to enhance that reads:

''While nowadays the Scouting movement prohibits the use of corporal punishment as part of its activities, this was not always so, and in spanking stories they often go hand in hand, especially with Beaver and Cub Scouts. There are also some spanking drawings that show young scouts, e.g. by Comixpank.''

''Because of the connotations of discipline that comes with scouting, some adult spankophiles like to roleplay/ageplay a boy or girl scout (similar to playing schoolboys).''

Exactly what kind of perverts are Wikia and the Wikimedia Foundation enabling, by allowing them free and unfettered access to simple pictures of boys, that are then twisted and exploited on your for-profit company's website, so that they are interwoven into adult perversions and roleplay?

I know I'm not supposed to , but you really ought to spend a minute or two reviewing this analysis of what's going on, before you unwittingly spawn a worldwide boycott of Amazon.com, the primary investor in Wikia "Spanking Art", for being a pro-pedophilia corporation. - ] (]) 02:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
:You're missing a detail here. Misplaced Pages is a 💕. When that photos was uploaded under free use, it became property of anyone and everyone. Uploading it as a free image says "I don't care who uses this and how they use this, as long as we're credited under the GFDL. So, ''every'' photo on Misplaced Pages can be "twisted and exploited" in the long run. ] (]) 03:35, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. In fact, Misplaced Pages users *are not* fully informed and thus cannot be assumed to have forfeited their intellectual property rights. Furthermore, the fact that an image is in the public domain does not mean that anyone may use it for any purpose; there are other legal restrictions (for example, libel). But beyond any legal considerations this kind of unrestricted license is unethical, as the example of the misuse of the boy scouts image demonstrates. In my opinion, Misplaced Pages should find or develop a different kind of license that does not give rise to these problems.] (]) 19:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

::If that's true, then it's kinda important to TELL people that. I mean, we encourage people to release their images under a free license. Do we tell them that Wikia can then take their images and use them for spanking art? -] <small>]</small> 03:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
:::]' top two center around the lead singer of ] on the one hand, and ] on the other. Thank you for your insight into the GFDL, property law, and photography. How about we get a discourse now about public relations disasters? - ] (]) 04:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
::::A. Yeah, note that all my edits there are vandalism reverts because those are two high targets. B. Also note that I'm an admin on Misplaced Pages, so clearly some people trust me. I would appreciate it if you'd take your ''ad hominem'' attacks elsewhere. Thanks, ] (]) 04:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
:::In response to Amarkov: the closest equivalent we have is the statement on every edit page that says "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, '''do not submit it'''." and the mention (and link to) the GFDL policy on Misplaced Pages. There is no explicit "here are some examples of how your submission might be used," just those general statements. ] (]) 04:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
:Is there a reason that you are complaining on Misplaced Pages when the problem you have is with Wikia? Another site is using our image (or rather the Wikimedia Commons' image) in accordance with copyright in a way that you find inappropriate. There is nothing that Misplaced Pages can do. <font face="Broadway">]'']</font>'' 04:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
::Sorry, I saw above that this is the place to praise Mr. Wales for his development of Wikia, Inc. I assumed that it would also be the place to bring criticisms of Wikia to light. - ] (]) 04:21, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
:::There is no scandal here. ]. ] (]) 11:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
:::Like most people, Jimbo has an email address and he even lists it on his userpage and like most websites, Wikia has an easy to find "" page. I would suggest you use one of those if you want someone to actually deal with this issue. <font face="Broadway">]'']</font>'' 21:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I would like ] to clarify whether the five boys whose faces are shown in that picture were told, "If you don't want your image to be perverted mercilessly or redistributed for profit by 'spankophiles', '''do not pose for it'''." Also, does ] believe that ] (the photographer) explained the GFDL to these 11- or 12-year-olds, and did they comprehend it? Does ] have the authority to release the photo without permission from the 5 boys' parents? I suppose he does, just as Wikia Spanking Art has the authority to reprint the photo in a perverted context. I've notified the three regional chapters of the Boy Scouts in the San Francisco / San Jose area (headquarters of Wikimedia and Wikia). If they don't respond to this themselves, then I suppose there is no scandal, and we should applaud the triumph of free knowledge. -- -- ] (]) 20:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

:Since the image is not being used commercially, and the boys are not recognizable celebrities, there can not be any ] issues involved in the U.S., where the ] unequivocally permits all non-commercial publications of photographs that don't infringe on statutes, as ]. However, ]. ] (]) 21:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
::Jimbo, in his capacity with Wikia, certainly has the power to get rid of the image even if the use is legally permissible. I am not a lawyer either so I don't know if the use is permissible, but I'm certainly concerned about the possibilities. What do you think the odds are that any person involved in Scouting is going to contribute ''any'' Scouting-related photo if a company owned by Jimbo Wales is going to misuse those photos? I can tell you that if this photo stays up, I have contributed my last photo to Wikimedia projects. If this were a third party using it, ok, there isn't much that can be done, or at least whining about it here isn't going to accomplish anything. But it's a company founded/owned/run/whatever by Jimbo and he certainly has the power to do something about it. It's a question of moral obligations. I cannot speak to the legal obligations of personality rights - I am not a lawyer. --] (]) 22:10, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely right. Jimbo had a moral obligation to remove this photograph.] (]) 19:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

The potential for abuse of images, making wiki look bad, condoning child porn here is huge. Please act, Jimbo. If such use is condoned, I will no longer submit images of children to wiki. <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — ] • ] • </span> 22:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

:You guys are arguing against freedom. Against free speech. Against free culture. Against the free reuse of media. Against WikiMedia and Misplaced Pages. Go sell your love of slavery elsewhere. ] (]) 22:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

This is an abusive, ad hominem, response to a serious concern.] (]) 19:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

::You're joking, right? You have no freedom of speech on somebody else's internet site. Jimbo Wales is well within his rights to restrict in any way what content he will or will not publish on his own website. Your hysterics are ludicrous. --] (]) 22:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
::: True as far is it goes. But I think ] was referring to the reason for the call of removal. but it should be noted Jim does not own the website, ''Wikia, Inc.'' does. (Not to Say Jim is not a Big player in ''Wikia, Inc.'' --] (]) 23:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
: Now except its usage nowhere come close condoning child porn, and the admins of the wiki in question keep a close eye out to make sure it does not. --] (]) 00:22, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:::Provide link to their rules please. <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — ] • ] • </span> 00:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:::: and --] (]) 01:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Because it can be legally done doesn't mean it should be done. <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — ] • ] • </span> 22:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

:I don't think we are going to get a resolution here and I don't think we can fix what is already out there. This particular usage is odious<s>, but innocuous</s>; it does drive home a point we never considered. We should discuss this within the Scouting project. We have editors in the project from many countries with many different laws and the different national Scouting organizations will have varying rules on youth protection. We can't ban anyone from releasing photos in this manner, but everyone should be aware of the potential issues and each editor is going to have to make their own decisions on this. Personally, I have a camera full of photos from this past weekend that I was processing, but I think they are staying on my PC for now until I think on this some more. --<i><b>—&nbsp;]<font color = "darkblue">&nbsp;<sup>]</sup></font></b> - </i> 00:25, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
::Well, there are three different avenues of resolution - (1) appeal to the editors involved, (2) appeal to the website owner, (3) legal cease & desist from the Scout council (] with Rlevse's youth protection obligations?). This discussion here is #2. Regardless of whether or not Rlevse is legally permitted by the council to license photos he takes at Scouting functions under the GFDL and regardless of whether or not photos of those Scouts can legally be used in this manner, we are asking Jimbo, as a reasonable person, to voluntarily refrain from using the kids in this way. It's not an innocuous use if you are one of the kids or the parent of one of the kids depicted on this website and it's a very reasonable, informal, request that Rlevse's moral rights as the photographer be respected. --] (]) 00:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:::I stand corrected. I dug into the site (more than I wanted to) and I find some of the context quite disturbing. --<i><b>—&nbsp;]<font color = "darkblue">&nbsp;<sup>]</sup></font></b> - </i> 02:35, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
::::The real question is what was whoever approved this Wikia thinking? <span>] <sup>]</sup></span> 02:37, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

:::::I see 2 issues here. One is concerning the copyright on the photos and the other is over wikia cities (or sub-projects). There are pro-pedophile wikis out there, I won't say where, and if images are free that means that as long as those wikis are legal that the images are freely available. We cannot have a GFDL copyright or copyleft that only excludes pro-pedophile sites (if those sites are deemed legal and if they do not contain pornography they generally are considered legal). This is an issue for lawyers not for Jimbo, or at the very least for the whole community. The wikia issue is different, I have heard the pic has been removed and the page locked. Jimbo has a good record of opposing pedophilia activism on wikipedia IMHO, doubtless a mistake was made here and its great if it is being resolved but I don't think we can conclude from this that Jimbo is anything other than offering the kind of leadership we expect on this issue, including ensuring that wikipedia is a a safe place for children to edit. Thanks, ] 05:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

There is no good reason not to exclude proponents of pedophilia from any civilized venue. I've known victims of pedophiles and they've been scarred for life.] (]) 19:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

:::::: said lock is only temporary till the issue is resolved, it has not yet been decided --] (]) 05:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Freedom is the right for people to be free to act the way ''they'' want to act. The ] movement is about enabling people to create, modify, and distribute information as text, sounds, images, or video by providing ] software tools and content for modification and redistribution. It is not free if the uses are legally restricted to the original content creator's desired purposes. For that, you need to use a non-free copyright license. Misplaced Pages and WikiMedia have a mission of maximum worldwide '''free''' distribution of freely re-editable educational content. If one does not want content that they create to be legally free to be modified and redistributed for causes one does not personally endorse, then they should not contribute them to a ] site such as wikipedia. ] (]) 15:30, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I have no objection to anyone trying to get Wikia to only promote good things. What I objected to is attacks on the legal tool of ] copyrights which is needed in the fight for freedom. ] (]) 15:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
::You have my support, WAS, I totally agree. Badly using copyleft images is the responsibility of the people who use them, not of wikipedia for releasing the images with a copyleft copyright. Thanks, ] 23:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:I don't understand how copyright and honoring the ethics of personal privacy, especially of pre-pubescent minors, are somehow antithetical to "freedom". People are also "free" to organize boycotts of Amazon.com (#1 investor in Wikia) and to organize boycotts of donating to Wikimedia Foundation. Let's take a poll -- which do you think would win out in the court of public opinion? The fight for copyleft freedom, or the fight against online sites that promote a pro-pedophilia and pro-child-abuse agenda? Choose your sides, people. This is going to be a quick, decisive battle. - ] (]) 17:08, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
::Are you making threats? ] (]) 17:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:::I see no threats above, I see cold hard facts and a healthy dose of reality. Here's a frightening idea: let's say one of these kids or one of their parents happens to come across this photo. What is going to happen is the children in question will probably be quite upset, possibly affected psychologically, and the parents will be infuriated and go on the warpath. That's when lawsuits, phone calls to the press, and massive "what about the children?" drives begin. If anyone thinks Wikia can protect themselves by hiding behind the GFDL and copyleft they're sadly mistaken. Can they do so legally? Perhaps. But the ensuing massive bad publicity has the potential to bring the entire project (and any related projects) to its knees. It doesn't matter what is right under the law, it only matters how the public sees you. ] (]) 17:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
::::If anyone wants to sue Wikia, boycott their business partners or whatever it is this thread is being used to plan then take it off-wiki to Wikia directly. This is the encyclopedia, not Wikia. Do you have any complaints directed at ''Misplaced Pages''? ] (]) 17:41, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:::::I think that the complaints are directed toward the owner of this talk page, who has a stake in Wikia and Misplaced Pages. This incident, which has a potential of bringing disrepute to the founder of Misplaced Pages, has the potential to bring the entire Misplaced Pages project into disrepute, hence, it is not out of place to have this discussion here. "Donations keep this site running." Anything that has the potential to effect donations negatively has the potential of effecting Misplaced Pages negatively. ] 19:33, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

There are several issues involved. *I* was solely talking about people badmouthing the GFDL because it is able to be used to promote bad things. My interest was to defend the GFDL in spite of its ability to be used to promote bad things. Like some people defend gun ownership even tho guns can be used to do bad things. Defending the right to own a gun is not advocating murder. Defending copy left is not advocating bad things that can be done with copy left content. Advocating freedom to speak is not advocating that Misplaced Pages or Wikia allow anyone to say anything on either of those sites. I am for the right of people to legally advocate bad things on their own site (not Wikia or Wikimedia sites) using copyleft content. I am for people protesting the advocacy of bad things. I am against making either the advocacy or the protest illegal. I believe that freedom of expression is the best way to identify what in fact is a good thing versus what in fact is a bad thing; and in laws that outlaw doing bad things while retaining the freedom to advocate a change to those laws. ] (]) 17:47, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:Could someone explain how is inherently different than the "indecent images" ? I'm not seeing a gigantic difference. You say that defending the right to own a gun is not advocating murder. Likewise, defending the privacy rights of innocent children (who don't know a GFDL license from a proprietary watermark system for secure digital media) is not advocating censorship, or slavery, or abolition of the copyleft license, or whatever the heck would be the opposite of the "freedom" that you spoke of above. Continued debate on the legal intricacies of this problem while denying the moral magnitude of the situation is going to backfire on this project. -- -- ] (]) 19:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

::Are you saying that an image on WikiMedia servers breaks the law? If so, which image breaks which law? ] (]) 19:20, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

:::Are you daft? Do you not know the difference between the words "'''moral'''" and "'''legal'''"? How could you possibly respond to what I wrote with what you wrote, unless you are utterly trying to deflect this discussion to some arcane aspect of the situation that you can "win"? I'm done with trying to engage in finding a solution here. Let the authorities and the lawyers figure it out. I'm sure that perverted individuals who are exploiting youngsters will win the day. - - ] (]) 19:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

At what point are we ready to say this thread constitutes a legal threat and deal with it accordingly? ] (]) 19:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:Very nice - you want to ban us because we don't want pictures of Boy Scouts to be used to promote pedophilia? Nobody is threatening to sue or anything remotely like that - we are asking Jimbo to do the honorable thing and not allow a photo that Rlevse provided in good faith to be used in that manner. That isn't a threat - it's a polite request. --] (]) 20:23, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

:It doesn't. The thread is an appeal to Jimbo because it isn't illegal, thus can't be removed through normal methods. But Wales could remove it if he so wishes, though that might create a bad image for him. That might be one reason he is leaving this alone, there is no good answer here. <span>] <sup>]</sup></span> 20:22, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:I don't think at any point - I'd like you to point to any part of this thread where anyone has said, explicitly, or implied (even as far as "innocent queries about editing Misplaced Pages from a Department of Defense computer"), the involvement of any law enforcement authority. Or are you angling for the "chilling effect" of ensuring people don't rock the boat too much? Because I can't see a single point at which you could say "this thread needs to be shut down as a legal threat". Quite simply, it ain't there. ] (]) 22:07, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
::So now you assume that I'm playing games like it was some natural thing to do on Misplaced Pages because I was concerned about the tone and general language and purpose of the latter comments before I posted that ''question''. Sweet. So now the natural assumption when someone is concerned about a debate that he must be trying to chill the debate and silence the critics. I think that says more about Misplaced Pages these days and WR and the trolls who inhabit it than we needed to be reminded of. I'm gone anyway now but I do wonder what the DoD have to do with ''anything'' I've said. ] (]) 22:39, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
::Ahh, one ad hominem begets another, is that it? I'm still curious, though, I'm wondering what comments prompted you to run off down the "let's call this thread a legal threat and act accordingly". That's more than just "concern about tone and general language" of comments. ] (]) 23:25, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:::EconomicsGuy: you need to chill the hell out with your claims of legal threats. You're CLEARLY trying to silence the critics because as far as I can tell, two of your posts here have been baldfaced implications that we're here making legal threats. What the hell would I or any of the other people here sue for? You're trying to draw this into a circular logic trap and an ad hominem mudslinging contest and it won't work. Frankly, I'm here because I'm concerned ABOUT the project. If you'd taken the time to read what I wrote above and think about it before going into internet argument mode and automatically dismissing it as "legal threats", you'd see how something of this magnitude can affect not just Wikia, but everything else associated with it. As I said before, nobody cares about the legality of things, free media, etc. when children and borderline pedophilia are involved. And if you think anyone will be fair in their attacks, think again. So, we can all look forward to the news media screaming headlines like "Misplaced Pages associated website sued for kiddie porn." Which I guarantee will be the effective end of Misplaced Pages, as it's a considerably more high-profile target than Wikia itself is. But go right ahead- tell me I'm making legal threats and try to hush up people with real concerns regarding the project. ] (]) 23:46, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
::::If you think I'm going to grab the bait just because you repeat the accusations of bad faith and type in caps you're wrong. If you want Jimbo to act I suggest you send him a ''calm'' e-mail. He is far more co-operative and responsive than he is generally given credit for. I'm done here. Geez... ] (]) 07:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I have seen what could be considered kiddie porn on WMF and Wikia wikis, and a bunch of boy scouts, even on a wiki about spanking, doesn't come close. ] (]) 00:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

:Please give examples to back up what you say. Thanks, ] 00:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

::Actually please don't. Let's not start posting more objectionable material when it's not needed. This discussion was about should wikipedia be held responsible for anyone taking a perfectly innocent image from this website and using it elsewhere (for anything) and the simply answer is "no". Content is freely available to anyone and that includes people who would use the content for fetishistic and porn purposes. If you feel they are doing something wrong then take it up with them and their IP hosts. ] 02:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

::I agree with ] that further examples are not required. I also believe that every editor who has posted a photograph of a person or persons under the age of 16 should give serious consideration to taking whatever steps they are able to have those photographs deleted, barring written permission of the parent(s) of said child(ren) authorizing the posting of the photographs here on Misplaced Pages, complete with acknowledgement of the implications of the applicable license. Writing as the parent, I would not hesitate for a minute to demand takedown of any unauthorized photographs of my child that I happen to find anywhere on the web, but most particularly in a site such as Misplaced Pages, where the photographs can be (and no doubt are) taken by individuals of questionable intent. Indeed, Misplaced Pages and Commons should give serious consideration to refusing to host such photographic images without parental authorization. ] (]) 02:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

::SqueakBox, I know you know what I am talking about because I saw you on this very page discussing some possibly-underage ] girls in sexualized poses. ] (]) 08:12, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

A final recap: After much discussion here, the Boy Scout page on Spanking Arts was chopped, Wales deleted the image from their site and the SA folks created a new policy on images. The Scouting WikiProject is drafting a project guideline that notes the potentials for reuse of images in ways the photographer may not have intended. As there is no way to control reuse of images, we are recommending that editors do not upload images of youth. This reverses a personal push for more active images with Scouts to replace a lot of the boring images we currently have of buildings and empty waterfront areas.

There was an awful lot of discussion here about freedom, guns and other tangent subjects. Please understand that the Scouting WikiProject has no desire to attempt censorship; most of our editors are volunteer members of one of the myriads of national Scouting organizations around the world. We must answer to local and national laws, the rules and regulations of our organizations and each editor's moral compass. --<i><b>—&nbsp;]<font color = "darkblue">&nbsp;<sup>]</sup></font></b> - </i> 18:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

:These are good and sensible moves. ] (]) 19:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

:I'd like to throw this out here for discussion. First off, thank you Jimbo for deleting the image. Your willingness to step in is appreciated. I'd like to suggest as a project, we reexamine our licensing policy concerning identifiable images of persons under 18. (Identifiable means that it is zoomed in enough on a person's face that you could recognize that person if you saw them on the street.) We really ought to either permit these images to be licensed under a more restrictive licensing scheme that prohibits sexually explicit reuse OR we need to require parental informed consent to be logged with OTRS. I recognize that the former probably isn't going to happen, but the latter definitely should. --] (]) 19:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I, too, appreciate Jimbo's action on this subject. I agree that more thought needs to be given to the licensing question.] (]) 19:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

::This is the sort of nonsense that WR was trying to create in the first place. Child actors, faces in a crowd, etc. Don't contribute if you don't want your contribution to be under a free license that can be used by anybody for anything. ] (]) 19:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

This is total nonsense. Do you want images of you to be posted with the caption "child molester"? "Anybody for anything," my ass!] (]) 19:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

:::At issue is NOT the rights of the contributor. In every case, Scouters who have contributed these photos are doing so with the willingness that their contributions be used or adapted, commercial or otherwise, etc. The rights of the contributor aren't an issue. It's about the rights of the children depicted in the photo. Either (a) we need to protect their rights or (b) we need to make sure that their parents have given informed consent to the use of the photo. Neither the photographer nor Misplaced Pages has the authority to permit you to use a photo of someone else's child for sexually explicit purposes. That's a legal fact of life and we need to spell that out somewhere. Informed parental consent is the direction I'm leaning. --] (]) 20:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
:::Every comment you have made in this thread, WAS 4.250, seems to be an effort in making people appear draconian for demanding curtailing of contributor rights. You have invoked spurious appeals to emotion, "Go sell your love of slavery elsewhere." and such, in an effort to derail the discussion from what it was about - that there are, ethically, morally and legally, more peoples rights involved than that of the contributor. Personality and likeness rights - even if, from all interpretations of your comments - you have decided that such rights are inherently trumped by your rights - certainly an interesting approach to take. Even when it has been repeatedly explained that the issue is the right of an unintended/potentially unwilling subject to be depicted in a manner of their choosing, your responses have been predominantly along the lines of "ZOMG, the WR trolls are hounding down the GFDL! Slavers!", seemingly deciding instead that it's not the message that's important (or not), but the messenger. ] (]) 03:45, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
It appears that the Spanking Art site at Wikia has been shut down until they can sort out whether its administrators can restrain themselves from making it a site that focuses prurient attention of the abuse of children. Let's hope they get it right. - ] (]) 22:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

== Scientology article ==

Scientology definition page is constantly being vandalized and manipulated by the cult followers. Any time a word "cult" shows up there, it gets erased, Same with simple facts about the workings of this organization. I hope the founder of Misplaced Pages can somehow protect this article so that it is not misleading or manipulative. If Scientology is not a cult, than what is? Or should we get rid of that word entirely...
Any educated person with information about Scientology - it's practices, its workings, manipulations etc know what this cult is about. Let's not kid ourselves here. And the encyclopedia should be about information, knowledge, transparency - not manipulation, deletion of certain facts and informations.
Misplaced Pages is a very well known and popular online encyclopedia, lots of kids read it, it should be informative, not misleading and luring into some cults like Scientology. All the info on this cult is online, all the historical info on religions and cults as well, and in spite of that this particular entry here is constantly evolving into a nice little promo for this brainwashing racket. Some fact should be placed under the definition of Scientology - after all the encyclopedia is about informing, educating people not withholding information, isn't it? Just as this nice sentence on Jimmy's homepage states: "Free knowledge for free minds". Scientology is certainly not free, it keeps it's papers and procedures secretive and the same is going on on its definition page on Misplaced Pages. Gradually crucial info is being erased by some very active individuals. Kind regards --] (]) 17:36, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
:As pretty much the only Scientologist currently editing, I have to laugh. The only "very active individual" in the Scientology articles is a prolific critic that is interested in "constantly evolving" the series "into a nice" exposition of his POV and evolving WikiNews "into a nice little promo" for a bunch of Anon cyberterrorists (see ]). --] (]) 18:12, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

:: Dear JustaHulk :) since you are obviously biased here, and as we all know the cults main point is to manipulate the minds of its members, I do not think you should be able to edit the article or being taken seriously. And do not meddle with the facts, you are pretending not to know what has been going on with this particular entry for years on end or you are very new to Misplaced Pages. Either way you seem to be kinda oblivious to some simple facts. I hope you can educate yourself a little bit, read about this organisation and stop being manipulated by the cult. I wish you the best. --] (]) 10:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
:::Pitdog, the self-imposed mind control of ill-informed bigotry is much more likely, more prevalent, and more damaging than any shifts in point-of-view that a Scientologist may experience by virtue of studying Scientology. --] (]) 14:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

::::Please tell my why you are mentioning some ill-informed bigotry. What do you know about me and my knowledge, my experiences? You are biased, if you have an some sense of fair play and justice, you should see that you shouldn't take part in editing an article about something in which you participate, especially a cult which manipulates its members. Read some info I provided above, then discuss. From me: over and out. I am not fair game, I will not further waste time talking to someone, who perhaps is manipulating the public forum. Just have some respect for the readers here and admit: as someone involved in the cult you are not able to make clear judgments about the organization. Your views are certainly not neutral, because you are a Scientologist. Scientology through its primitive mind controlling practices is a very dangerous organization. The "lessons", or auditing those are very old, simple and potentially very harming exercises for a victims psyche. Repetitions, prolonged monotonous sessions, hatred towards sciences like psychiatry, medicine in general - now we an start talking about bigotry ad doing harm to societies, to individuals... Cheers --] (]) 14:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
:::::I will not waste space here attempting to disabuse you of your ill-informed and bigoted (not to mention banal) misconceptions. Yes, people that know a subject may have a different opinion of it than those that do not and I guess you could call that "bias". --] (]) 14:34, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
::::::You are being offensive, throwing names around. Another typical cult tactic (this particular cult) - attack, fair game. Please explain what is ill informed about simple very well known facts, pick one - secrecy of the cult, money grabbing, all the L,R.Hubbard "teachings" which are basically drunk man' blabberings (or am I mistaken, correct me and show the wisdom of that con man lol). And again lets get back to the main point - where is NPOV if an active member of the cult is editing the page?? Be fair, have some dignity and respect for the readers and do not involve yourself in creating a biased, misinforming Misplaced Pages entry on Scientology. Have you read the sources I provided? A simple question. Read and understood I mean. --] (]) 15:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
:::::::Trust me, I am extremely familiar with ALL sides of this issue. And it is your ill-informed, one-sided blatherings that are truly offensive. And readers here will be glad to hear that I am done rising to your trolling. --] (]) 16:29, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Scientology should be ridiculed in accordance with ], because virtually everyone agrees it's ridiculous. <font size="--] (]) 14:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC)4">]</font>&nbsp;<font face="impact">&nbsp;]</font>&nbsp;(]) 02:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
:Please don't say things that are unnnecessarily inflammatory, and may offend other editors. --] <small>]</small> 02:40, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

* ''as Cult is the total cultural aspects of a religion, as they are distinguished from others.'' In theory its can be applied to all religions equally, what the problem is that "cult" is perceived in the negative when added to a religion as such the use of "cult" should be exercised with caution where the term is used it use should be clearly inline with ]. In general respect should be given to the wording of all religious articles and terms that have such extreme negative perceptions should be avoided in the general writing of articles and left to the quotes of experts on the subject. ]] 03:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

It is not difficult to find operative definition of cults by those who have studied the cult phenomenon. In general, they focus on absolutism, deceptive recruiting practices, exorbitant charges, discouragement of thinking for oneself, demonization of critics and those who leave the cult, etc. This is the way the word "cult" is actually used by literate people. By these criteria, Scientology is a cult. All that would be necessary to satisfy the "neutral point of view" criterion would be to say that Scientology has been described by experts in new religious movements (who could be quoted)as a cult. ] (]) 19:33, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

::So can I put some expert quotes on the subject of this cult there? So that the article is not misleading and becomes a bit more informative? Cult implies manipulation, mind control- yes, it is a negative term, that is precisely why it applies to Scientology. If this is not a cult, than what is I ask? Kind regards --] (]) 10:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
:::Cult doesnt mean "manipulation" "mind control" to use the term to imply such violates ]. Scientology is a religion if you have issues with it then editing an article to push your POV is doing exactly what you are complaining about. Something about "let he who is free of sin cast the stone"... ]] 14:02, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
:::: We must be talking about a different word with different definition. So what a cult means in your opinion? The saying about the stone and sin - what it has to do with facts? Being neutral means no manipulation, no withholding information. Pretending that Scientology is not a cult is like pretending that right now theres peace and democracy in Iraq. I see no point in further discussion on this level. Scientology is a cult if you have issues with it that its your right to be misinformed, but why misinform the general public? You mention being objective, and yet the page is being actively edited by a member or members of the cult. Where is objectivity in that? Please do not twist the facts, it is pointless. ". By "fact" we mean "a piece of information about which there is no serious dispute." a quote form NPOV article. Regards --] (]) 14:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
::::: You're talking about a very loaded word, with multiple definitions and connotations. Cult can mean any religious sect you don't like. And it doesn't even need to be religious. You could all benefit by reading the Misplaced Pages article on ]s, which is really quite excellent. And by the way, the proposed psychological definition fits the Navy SEALS or the Marine Corps a lot better than it does Scientology. Take people who are young or otherwise mentally vulnerable, then break-em-down, then build-em-up, and the finally use them for whatever purpose you like, is an old, old human process. ]]]] 20:14, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

The world cult can be used to mean "any religious sect you don't like." However, that's not the neutral or objective definition of ], and ] ''is'' a cult that it is ridiculed by virtually all '''''neutral''''' parties. Supporting the treatment of Scientology as a potential "religion" that faces "prejudice" or "persecution" by "anti-Scientologist bigots" is a violation of ], ], and ]. The claim that the neutral definition of cult applies to religions and the Navy SEALS or USMC may be a perfectly logical inference, which may be true. However, it is also ]. <font size="4">]</font>&nbsp;<font face="impact">&nbsp;]</font>&nbsp;(]) 08:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

May I respectfully submit that this is not the proper place to debate the merits (or lack thereof) of Scientology? Nor is the proper place anywhere on Misplaced Pages, or any of its sister projects. ''All'' users with strong points of view about a subject, be they approval or disapproval, are advised to be ], lest they unknowingly introduce bias. - ] (]) 08:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

So do you think that an article on the Flat Earth Society should make no mention of the fact that it's a scientific consensus that they're completely wrong? ] (]) 19:33, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

:This is actually very very simple. Chardish is 100% correct. And anyone who says that NPOV demands that we call Scientology a cult has really completely, utterly and totally missed the point of NPOV as dramatically as possible. On any controversial issue, Misplaced Pages must not take a stand. It is certainly fine (and necessary for NPOV) to discuss that reputable sources have raised the question of whether Scientology is a cult. It may also be fine, depending on what the source says, to say that the source has "alleged" or "claimed" that it is. Or that many commentators have. Or whatever might be the case. But Misplaced Pages itself can have no opinion on the matter one way or the other.--] (]) 09:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

This is not so black-and-white as it may appear. Is O.J. Simpson a murderer? Common sense says he is. Are we not to be allowed to draw obvious conclusions? Clearly, the Scientology article needs to be protected from self-serving edits by Scientologists. ] (]) 19:33, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
:''Every'' article needs to be protected from self-serving edits by ''every and anyone''. "Common sense" can only be included if it is referenced by a reliable third party source. ] (]) 23:27, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Jim agreed with Chardish's remarks above, which are pretty reasonable. The way Jim phrased it was a bit odd, but since he agreed with Chardish, I wouldn't try to read into it. Also, to clarify: My original comment above was facetious, lol. <font size="4">]</font>&nbsp;<font face="impact">&nbsp;]</font>&nbsp;(]) 23:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
:Not oddly phrased at all. At the risk of, etc. Jimbo is agreeing with Chardish regarding the responsibilities of editors, esp. editors with strong POVs and Jimbo is also commenting on a different though related point of what Misplaced Pages articles should look like as regards appearing to take a position themselves as opposed to clearly setting out the positions of the various sides based on reputable sources. Now ''that'' is oddly worded! --] (]) 15:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

== Native Son ==

Since you are the second most famous native son of Alabama, ] being the first, are there any streets (buildings? state constitutional amendments?) named after you? Huntsville(Madison)? , Tuscaloosa?, ''that other school''? --] (]) 17:56, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
:Is this a joke? You're joking, right? ]<sup>]</sup> 18:43, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
::Name somebody from Alabama more famous than Jimmy? There are no presidents. So that only leaves ]? He was born in Germany --] (]) 18:45, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Possible candidates are ], ], ], ], ], and ], for a start. And that's just off the top of my head. ]<sup>]</sup> 18:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

::And there's also George Wallace.--] (]) 09:31, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
:Oh and I'm more alarmed that you list ''Forest Gump'' as being the most famous than I am at your assertion that Jimmy is the second-most. At least Jimmy is real, and justly famous. ]<sup>]</sup> 18:50, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
::People KNOW Forrest Gump. Helen Keller? "Oh the blind chick on the quarter", Rosa Parks? You mean the OutKast song?, Hank Aaron? that dude whose record was broken by steroid BB, and people are more likely to know Attaicus Finch than Harper Lee.--] (]) 18:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

:Forest Gump isn't even a native son of Alabama any more than ] is a native son of Mississippi, and I find it extraordinary that anyone would think otherwise. Thanks, ] 19:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
::Tom sawyer is from Missouri. (hey whats this? why I think its some of that '''Extraordinary''' that going around)--] (]) 19:04, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
:::La la la. --] (]) 19:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
:I, being born in Alabama, find the Forrest Gump sentiment prevalent. I usually tell such people about our "law" keeping women barefoot until they are 15, and am frequently met with, "really?" :-) ] (]) 21:40, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
::When I travel I always get the "but you don't have an accent" statement. I retort with "Well we only do that for the tourists..." Then breaking into the most exaggerated drawl ".. not so much for their entertainment, but to keep them from sticking around too long."--] (]) 01:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
:::Mitrebox, is that joke CC licensed? ...cause I shore do wanna use it... ;-)--] (]) 09:31, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
::::Jimbo, I think thats one of very few jokes I ever came up with on my own. And I tell you what... I'd sure be mighty proud if anyone ever used it to get a laugh.--] (]) 19:44, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
:::Well when I heard Jimbo on the radio he certainly sounded like he had a strong accent, but perhaps that is merely my British ears. Thanks, ] 07:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
::::My Midwestern ears hear no accent after listening to him speak for an hour. ] (]) 08:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
:], most influential Alabamian of the 20th century. ] 05:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

== Trinitarian Biased Impedance of Nontrinitarian Article improvement ==

{{tnull|help}} I'm sure you have higher priority things on your plate, but my distress has motivated me to contact you, as one of the more senior administrators of this Encyclopedia, to request that you review/create policy that will more fairly and effectively detect and deal with the hidden biases put into action via impedance of article improvements that conflict with said biases. ie, there is enough evidence now I think at the ] that the influence of Trinitarian Administrators and editors is becoming harmful. ] (]) 17:49, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I can't see that ever happening, even if Jimbo agreed with you.

Headline: "Jimbo edits article on Trinitarianism, blocks Christian admins -- his anti-Christian bias shows!" etc, etc..

] would have a field day with it and he'd be thrown in with "the leftist conspiracy" on the ], though it would probably be funny to see what jokes ] would make about it.

If the users there are regularly violating a certain policy, like ], ], or ], report them for it and help clarify that specific policy more explicitly rather than expecting Jim to step in where he obviously can't. <font size="4">]</font>&nbsp;<font face="impact">&nbsp;]</font>&nbsp;(]) 19:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
: "Gods! What a monster." - Jean-Luc Picard.<br />Thank you for the heads up on ]. ] (]) 19:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
: You may wish to take a look at ] to see if there is anything there to help you interact with your <s>colleagues</s> on the article more fruitfully. ] (]) 16:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

== Request to Wikimedia Foundation ==

Recently, Korean Misplaced Pages comunity decide upon Fair use.

Korea Misplaced Pages approve to use "Fair use works".

According to Wikimedia Licensing policy Resolution Article 6,

"The Foundation resolves to assist all project communities who wish to develop an EDP with their process of developing it." (http://wikimediafoundation.org/Resolution:Licensing_policy)

On the basis of Wikimedia Licensing policy Resolution Article 6, the Korean Misplaced Pages Comunity request Wikimedia Foundation to assist to make Korean Wikipedian EDP. -- <b><font face="Arial" color="teal">]</font><font color="1F860E"><sup>'']''</sup></font></b> 00:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

:It's wrong. Korean Misplaced Pages didn't approve fair use. It was polling without consensus. --] (]) 11:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I write other opinion at following. (See: '''Today, I am blocked''') -- <b><font face="Arial" color="teal">]</font><font color="1F860E"><sup>'']''</sup></font></b> 04:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

==Regarding discussion from earlier this month==
Dear Mr. Wales, I have edited ''Misplaced Pages'' since 2006 and have spent a lot of time lately (I now have over 10,000 edits) creating articles, welcoming new users, uploading photographs I took, etc. I am deeply worried about some issues concerning our project. Accordingly, I second Maniwar's request from 23 January 2008 and strongly urge you to consider providing guidance into that matter as I believe it deals with the fundamental nature of what ''Misplaced Pages'' is. For myself, my friends, my family, my students, and my colleagues, we all value ''Misplaced Pages'' as not necessarily the source for everything, but the fastest reference for just about as many obscure matters/topics/people that are hard to find elsewhere. As something that is not paper and considering your own quotation about imagining "," I believe we have an unprecedented opportunity to catalog as much of human knowledge as possible. Yet, too typically the same minority of editors who spend an overabundance of time using Twinkle to mass nominate articles for deletion or hovering around policy pages will call articles involving topics that they are not personally interested in as "crap" or "non-notable." Well, I hate ], but others may enjoy it and while I have no interest in its history or influence, others do, so I don't say, in effect "", as others do on topics they do not care about. What is notable to one person may not be notable to another, but that reality does not negate that the subject is notable to somebody. I am deeply concerned that the determined efforts of an incredibly small fraction of our community (thousands of good faith editors spend time writing articles that are redirected or prodded; only a handful participate in AfDs or Arbcom discussions, or writing increasingly restrictive policy/guideline pages for which the majority of the community apparently does have consensus). My concern is that ''Misplaced Pages'''s value as a comprehensive source for many diverse topics is being undermined and as a further consequence our contributors are feeling or are outright on the project. As the founder of this project, your opinion would be of great help as I think we need better clarity about what the project is supposed to be, i.e. are we merely creating an online clone of ''Britannica'' or are we attempting to do what ''Britannica'' never could do. At present, we are instead left with editors making such insulting, deletionist posts as in AfDs. Thank you for your time and understanding. Sincerely, --<font face="Times New Roman">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 01:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

== Pass the barnstars, please! ==

{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Surreal Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I, Basketball110, award you this barnstar for "adding special flavor" to the community by... well... just to sum it up, creating Misplaced Pages. I think that's saying enough. ''']]]''' 02:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
|}

== NPOV, Objectivity, and Objectivism. ==

According to ], ] says nothing of objectivity. "Rather, the policy is simply that we should ''describe'' disputes, not ''engage'' in them."

Yes, but shouldn't we ''describe'' disputes ''objectively''? See here.

You're an ] and the idea of ] and ] seems to be implied by Misplaced Pages policy, but it's hidden behind the euphemisms, "fair and equal assessment", "fairly and without bias" and "fair, analytical description." (See ])

Is Misplaced Pages policy or philosophy compatible with either ] or ]?

I can't help but think that a lack of regard for ] and ] in policy encourages ]. <font size="4">]</font>&nbsp;<font face="impact">&nbsp;]</font>&nbsp;(]) 18:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

:I've never thought of it as Misplaced Pages's job to prefer either ] or ], ] or ]. My understanding is that the job is just to try to describe and explain, reliably, the different philosophies and the arguments that have been made for each, and let people decide for themselves what's best for them. Best, --] (]) 22:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Tthere is no such thing as "Misplaced Pages" apart from ''individual'' editors. See ].

When you say "reliably," this again seems like a euphemism and begs the question Is it ''reliable'' to have a conscious disregard for individual critical thinking, reason, and objectivity when verifying neutral sources? Is ] compatible with ]? <font size="4">]</font>&nbsp;<font face="impact">&nbsp;]</font>&nbsp;(]) 00:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

:Do you have a problem with a specific article? Best, --] (]) 01:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

No. That seems like an accusation of bad-faith, so I was about to say, "]." But for the moment I will ] and simply say, "Thank you for offering to help me." Since you're a helpful person, you could start by helping the person above with the problems they're facing on ]. <font size="4">]</font>&nbsp;<font face="impact">&nbsp;]</font>&nbsp;(]) 02:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

== ] ==

I started developing a full-fledged toolbar for Misplaced Pages. I don't normally go for toolbars since they're so invasive, but this one isn't, and with all the time I spend on Misplaced Pages it's a nice convenience. I think this has the potential to be a good promotional arm of Misplaced Pages, if it's developed right -- the same way as the Yahoo and Google toolbars promote use of those sites. I was wondering about possibly getting the developers involved. I'm only a beginner at this and can't develop it to its full potential on my own. Please check it out and let me know what you think. Thanks. <small style="font:bold 10px Arial;display:inline;border:#009 1px dashed;padding:1px 6px 2px 7px;white-space:nowrap">] ]/] ''01:40, 29 Jan 2008 (UTC)''</small>

== Today, I am blocked. ==

I am korean wikipedian. I use it 4 years.

Today, I am recommaned to admin by other user. and I am bolcked permenatly.

I don't agree it. I don't break the rule.

How to solve this problem?

I've said to the Korean wiki admins dictatorship.

They recommand thier people to admin.


== Happy New Year to Misplaced Pages's Founder! ==
And, someone who said to admin's mistake is blocked. they have many supporters. all attack one user. one user fight soly. And finally, admin blocked him because major users want.


Happy New Year Jimbo Wales! Wish you luck in 2025! ] (]) 03:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
I am the MOST famous fair-use suppoter in kowiki.


==]==
All admins disagree fair use. All.
]
]
Happy New Year Jimbo!!! I hope all is well with you and your team.


Could you or your page watchers help me with ]? The draft has been declined and tagged up. It was then deleted years ago. I had it restored today after I came across one of his photos. I think he and his photography are fascinating for capturing aspects of New Zealand's transportation and industrial history. His work is in museum and library collections. At least one of his photographs has been used in a book. He photographed Maori sites.
Recently, fair-use policy is passed. this is 3rd poll.


], standing beside a collection of Maori carvings, including two fire-screens, carved by her father Albert Percy Godber]]
before 1st poll, many people discussed it.
I'm sorry I haven't been able to work the draft up enough to get it admitted to mainspace. It does make me wonder about what we do and don't include, our notability criteria, Articles for Creation (AfC) process, and collaborative ethos. Thanks so much for any help or guidance you can offer! Have a great 2025 and beyond. Thanks again. ] (]) 17:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
:If Godber is not ], which is what the draft reviewers say, then Wikipedians can't fix that. ] (]) 09:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::] is he "notable" and should we have an entry on him? ] (]) 17:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I dunno, but ] wrote that the draft did not show significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject at that point. ] (]) 19:37, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
]
::::And this a request to revisit his finding. We have a photographer from more than 100 years ago who documented areas of New Zealand's North Island. We have his work in a National Library collection. We have his work discussed as iconic for one of his Maori related photographs. We have his work revisited in a 2018 exhibition. We have descriptions of him related to his photographs, his career, and we have the photos themselves documenting the areas industries, sites, infrastructure from more than 100 years ago. If I was satisfied with the previous conclusions I would not be here. So I ask again, should we have an entry on this subject? Should we just attribute his photos where we use them to an unlinked name with no explanation or discussion of who he was? I think the answer is clear, and I wanted to hear Jimbo's opinion. I am aware of what was previously stated. Years have passed and I believe it's time to reevaluate and consider. I also think it's worth reflecting on our article creations processes more generally and how we apply our conception of "notability". ] (]) 23:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
*Godber's photographs include "views of the ] including large numbers of cars traveling to ], and the ]. Another group of images relate to a holiday at the ] Homestead in ] with scenes of farm life, including ], ] sheep, and farm buildings. During their stay in the South Island Godber also took photographs of Dunedin (including the ], ], ], the ], and the Hillside Railway Workshops); ] (including the Invercargill Railway Workshops); Stewart Island, ], ], ], ] and ]. Various railway stations in Canterbury and Otago, the ], and the Rosslyn Mills. Godber was a volunteer fireman with the Petone Fire Brigade with the album including views of the building, groups of firemen, fire engines and other fire fighting equipment, and a building in Petone damaged by fire. In his work with New Zealand Railways, mainly at the Petone Railway Workshops, he took interior photographs of various buildings, including the Machine Shop and finishing benches, the engine room, lathes, boilers, and fitting shops. He also took photographs of many of the steam engines that were built and worked on at the workshops. One scene shows a group of men watching a fight. Many images show his interest in logging railways, particularly in the ], ], ] area. Scenes of logging camps, various methods of transporting logs including bullock teams, logging trains, and dams created and then tripped to send logs down by river, and timber mills. Other topics covered in Godber's photographs are scenes at Maori ] and meeting houses, with some of the people identified; Maori carving and rafter designs; beekeeping, and gold mining." ] (]) 23:52, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
*It's hard to choose which photos to share. Historic views areas, industries, bridges, natural features, railways and bridges, crafts. to his photos on Misplaced Pages Commons. Many already illustrate our entries on various subjects. ] (]) 00:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
:: If you really want to help him, get a couple stories published about him in newspapers. Notability here will follow. ] (]) 01:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)


== Just wanted to say ==
I request 1st poll at 2006 year. disapprove.


You have created something valuable to everyone on the Internet. I'm sure you get this a lot, but thank you. <br>It may sound weird, but Misplaced Pages has helped me through some tough times. We can never thank you enough for this sometimes infighting, sometimes peaceful, sometimes divided, but always united community You are the backbone of the <s>cabal of editors</s> <b>thriving community</b> that is Misplaced Pages.
I collact fiar use agree users. Finally, agree users are more than disgree users.
I wish I could give you a BarnMilkyWay but no one's come up with that, apparently. (]) &#124; (PS: Have a good day) 00:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)


== ==
I request 2st poll at 2007 year. disapprove. agree number=disagree number. According to the korean constitutional spirit, yes=no is dissapproved.


For the interested. ] (]) 10:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
other user request 3rd poll at 2007 year Dec. Finally, approved, recently.


:Summary: {{tq|This document intends to show the problematic situation in Hebrew Misplaced Pages (hewiki), and provide evidence that it has been overtaken by a group of mostly religious and nationalist editors, who prevent others from achieving higher permissions while promoting their own allies.}} –] <small>(])</small> 22:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
And they disagree the 3rd poll's result.


== Happy new year ==
And today, fianlly I am blocked permenatly. :(


Good days, Jimbo. I'd like to say that Chinese Misplaced Pages is introducing ARBCOM System currently, since Arbcom on this project, and in fact all the project is originated from the idea of yours, do you have any opinion for that? Any hints, advice or suggestions? ] 15:43, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
I think that all korean admins are blocked. Their power miss use are too much.


== ==
But, I think that this opinion is not approved. no admins? oops. They have many fans.


That doesn't sound good. From '']''. ] (]) 09:37, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
I understand. :(


:Being discussed at ]. ] (]) 10:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
GOODBYE. -- <b><font face="Arial" color="teal">]</font><font color="1F860E"><sup>'']''</sup></font></b> 04:22, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
::Thanks! ] (]) 11:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:Please don't be trolling anymore. you never can be helped out of ko.wp. i am really sorry to owner of this talk page but '''Jimbo Wales is your god but not wikimedia's''' --]] 14:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
::Also discussed at ] and ]. ] (]) 19:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC)


Jimbo, could I ask you please to respond to from {{u|Tryptofish}}?
== WikiNews is a crack whore ==
:... it's not just if you've edited about Israel-Palestine. It could be if you've edited anything about climate and fossil fuels, gender, immigration, vaccines, and of course, American politics. I doubt that they have the bandwidth to actually identify and harass every editor who could possibly be seen as editing information that goes against a MAGA POV, but they will likely find some easily identified targets, whom they will use to "set an example", as a way of instilling fear in our editing community. I fully expect that, in the coming months, {{u|Jimbo Wales}} will be hauled before a hostile and performative Congressional hearing, much in the manner of university presidents. I hope very much that he will be better prepared than ] was.
:Yeah, I know this is grim. But I believe the first step in dealing with this is to go into it with our eyes open, to know what we are dealing with, what motivates it. And, more than harming individual editors, the real objective of Heritage ''et al.'' is to instill fear in the rest of us. If we become too fearful to revert POV edits, they win. In a very real sense, we have to keep doing what we have been doing, and continue to be a reliable resource for NPOV information. --] (]) 18:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
] (]) 05:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)


:Well, I fully agree that developments in terms of arguments and actions aimed at destroying trust in knowledge (and of course our specific interest, trust in Misplaced Pages) are extremely worrisome, particularly as I agree that for many who are doing it, the motive does appears to be the undermining of civic norms and democracy. I also agree with Tryptofish in a part that you didn't quote: "In a narrow sense, it's technically true that if you "out" yourself, there's no point in anyone else doing it. But once your identity is known, you become vulnerable to all of the kinds of real-life harassment that doxed people find themselves subjected to. It doesn't matter, in that regard, how they found out your identity." That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face.
] is for sale to any POV-pusher with a dime and the time. The admins and editors over there pimp her out for the lulz. They have allowed our own ] (not my words) Anti-Scientologist ] to turn her into the “official voice of Anonymous”; our own little ''Anti-Scientology News''. We get an article a day, usually a “Featured Story”, on the ] and the ] of this barely notable effort.<br><br>You know, I could really care less if some group of /l/osers wants to go after the Church of Scientology. The Church of Scientology is a big boy and can take care of itself. I don’t even really care much about what degree of success they may have in making trouble for the Church of Scientology. Scientology is just a bunch of people doing something they believe in to better themselves and others and no amount of DDoS attacks or “Honk If You Hate Scientology” signs is going to change that or even impact it one whit.<br><br>Nah, what frosts my ass is that this group, this one right here; a group that I respect, a group that really really should know better, allows a propagandist (and, at 5000-6000 edits per month, likely a full-time paid propagandist) to take over one of their projects. Now you know how I really feel. Oh, and if someone would be so kind as to inform Cirt that he is mentioned here, it would be nice. He has expressly asked me to not post to his page. --] (]) 15:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
:As a side note, I don't think that the reliability of the Heritage Foundation as a source is particularly related to these despicable actions. Whether they should be considered a reliable source in some matters is really unrelated to whether they hate us or not.--] (]) 14:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
:For Sale! I'm going to search my couch cushions for change, gotta outbid that one Ron Paul supporter out there.--] (]) 16:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
::Suddenly ] going to court to get user-data seems like the model of gentlemanly behavior. ] (]) 11:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
::'''Jimbo''': This has been discussed at length. Please see multiple comments from Admins and editors that weighed in on this and found no fault with my editing/article writing, both , and . I think no matter if 100 Admins weigh in and say that my actions are appropriate, {{user|JustaHulk}} may simply continue to disruptively push the issue in any location that he can. Thanks, ] (]) 16:46, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
:::{{tq|That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face.}} Unfortunately, the scales have been inexorably slipping out from beneath the foundation's abilities or willingness to protect its volunteers for my entire wiki-career. There's no balancing force at work. The private equity community has made gadflies out of what we used to label reliable local news media; Alphabet and Meta are actively coopting precision, privacy, and the public domain, while attempting to minimize the effectiveness of good faith actors like Internet Archive. Now suddenly en.wikipedians are facing the sort of personal threats long experienced by volunteers at ru.wiki and zh.wiki. The forces now arrayed against free information don't need to be actively coordinating in order to rapidly bring us to 2+2=5 territory. Any established editor could reasonably see Western culture has been under relentless attack for a long time. Here comes the Heritage Foundation's leaks, hot off Heritage's bangup release of Project 2025, leaking articles through partisan outlets apparently intended to make it appear (in one case) the ADL's recent reliability downgrade at RSNP was anyone else's fault but the ADL's own writings and actions. The news of such activity appears to threaten the community members directly and personally. ] (]) 13:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Jimbo, please also note that I did ''not'' write the second ''Wikinews'' article cited above by ]/]. That was actually started by a new user to ''Wikinews'', and then worked on by {{user|DragonFire1024}}, an Admin on ''Wikinews''. ] (]) 16:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
"First of all, let's get one thing straight, crack is cheap. I make too much money to ever smoke crack." - ] to ]. Also ] to ]. --<font color="#0000C0">David</font> ''']''' 17:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
::We're talkin' cheap here. --] (]) 17:17, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
:Getting back to the ] statement, as long as we're going to be using coarse language, might I ask if Wikinews is a recreational drug user? My question is: does wikinews use drugs specifically to enable certain sex acts, namely anal sex ? Is there a godwins law for crack whores?--] (]) 17:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh, so ''that's'' what ] looks like in our little wikiworld. Thanks for the demonstration! >;-o) ] (]) 17:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
:Nah. This is what a fair-minded but pissed-off editor looks like in our little wikiworld. --] (]) 17:17, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 13:30, 11 January 2025

    Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
    Start a new talk topic.
    Jimbo welcomes your comments and updates – he has an open door policy.
    He holds the founder's seat on the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees.
    The current trustees occupying "community-selected" seats are Rosiestep, Laurentius, Victoria and Pundit.
    The Wikimedia Foundation's Lead Manager of Trust and Safety is Jan Eissfeldt.
    This page is semi-protected and you will not be able to leave a message here unless you are a registered editor. Instead,
    you can leave a message here
    This is Jimbo Wales's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.
    Archives: Index, Index, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252Auto-archiving period: 10 days 
    This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.
    Media mentionThis talkpage has been mentioned by a media organization:

    Centralized discussion
    Village pumps
    policy
    tech
    proposals
    idea lab
    WMF
    misc
    For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.

    Happy New Year to Misplaced Pages's Founder!

    Happy New Year Jimbo Wales! Wish you luck in 2025! Gooners Fan in North London (talk) 03:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

    Albert Percy Godber

    Albert Percy Godber at his brass finishing lathe in the Petone railway workshops. A sign before him reads: `This is my busy day'
    "Looking down over a settlement with houses set amongst trees. The arm of a lake or harbour lies beyond, with a mountainous range on the far side. Photograph taken by Albert Percy Godber. Probably taken at Queenstown, Godber having visited Lake Wakatipu and Queenstown in 1926"

    Happy New Year Jimbo!!! I hope all is well with you and your team.

    Could you or your page watchers help me with Draft:Albert Percy Godber? The draft has been declined and tagged up. It was then deleted years ago. I had it restored today after I came across one of his photos. I think he and his photography are fascinating for capturing aspects of New Zealand's transportation and industrial history. His work is in museum and library collections. At least one of his photographs has been used in a book. He photographed Maori sites.

    "Phyllis Mary Godber wearing a Maori cloak, holding a taiaha, standing beside a collection of Maori carvings, including two fire-screens, carved by her father Albert Percy Godber

    I'm sorry I haven't been able to work the draft up enough to get it admitted to mainspace. It does make me wonder about what we do and don't include, our notability criteria, Articles for Creation (AfC) process, and collaborative ethos. Thanks so much for any help or guidance you can offer! Have a great 2025 and beyond. Thanks again. FloridaArmy (talk) 17:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

    If Godber is not WP:NOTABLE, which is what the draft reviewers say, then Wikipedians can't fix that. Polygnotus (talk) 09:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
    user:Polygnotus is he "notable" and should we have an entry on him? FloridaArmy (talk) 17:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
    I dunno, but User:Sulfurboy wrote that the draft did not show significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject at that point. Polygnotus (talk) 19:37, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
    "Godber family outside their house 'Railway Whare' at 23 Bay Street, Petone, circa 1906. From left to right: Albert Percy Godber, Mary Ann Godber, Laura Godber, Phyllis and William. Photograph taken by Albert Percy Godber"
    And this a request to revisit his finding. We have a photographer from more than 100 years ago who documented areas of New Zealand's North Island. We have his work in a National Library collection. We have his work discussed as iconic for one of his Maori related photographs. We have his work revisited in a 2018 exhibition. We have descriptions of him related to his photographs, his career, and we have the photos themselves documenting the areas industries, sites, infrastructure from more than 100 years ago. If I was satisfied with the previous conclusions I would not be here. So I ask again, should we have an entry on this subject? Should we just attribute his photos where we use them to an unlinked name with no explanation or discussion of who he was? I think the answer is clear, and I wanted to hear Jimbo's opinion. I am aware of what was previously stated. Years have passed and I believe it's time to reevaluate and consider. I also think it's worth reflecting on our article creations processes more generally and how we apply our conception of "notability". FloridaArmy (talk) 23:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
    • Godber's photographs include "views of the Hutt Valley including large numbers of cars traveling to Trentham Racecourse, and the Hutt River. Another group of images relate to a holiday at the Mendip Hills Homestead in Canterbury, New Zealand with scenes of farm life, including haymaking, merino sheep, and farm buildings. During their stay in the South Island Godber also took photographs of Dunedin (including the Ross Reservoir, Otago Boys' High School, Seacliff Mental Hospital, the 1926 Dunedin Exhibition, and the Hillside Railway Workshops); Invercargill (including the Invercargill Railway Workshops); Stewart Island, Moeraki, Tuatapere, Waiau River, Oamaru and Port Chalmers. Various railway stations in Canterbury and Otago, the Burnside Iron Mills, and the Rosslyn Mills. Godber was a volunteer fireman with the Petone Fire Brigade with the album including views of the building, groups of firemen, fire engines and other fire fighting equipment, and a building in Petone damaged by fire. In his work with New Zealand Railways, mainly at the Petone Railway Workshops, he took interior photographs of various buildings, including the Machine Shop and finishing benches, the engine room, lathes, boilers, and fitting shops. He also took photographs of many of the steam engines that were built and worked on at the workshops. One scene shows a group of men watching a fight. Many images show his interest in logging railways, particularly in the Piha, Karekare, Anawhata area. Scenes of logging camps, various methods of transporting logs including bullock teams, logging trains, and dams created and then tripped to send logs down by river, and timber mills. Other topics covered in Godber's photographs are scenes at Maori marae and meeting houses, with some of the people identified; Maori carving and rafter designs; beekeeping, and gold mining." FloridaArmy (talk) 23:52, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
    • It's hard to choose which photos to share. Historic views areas, industries, bridges, natural features, railways and bridges, crafts. Here's a link to his photos on Misplaced Pages Commons. Many already illustrate our entries on various subjects. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
    If you really want to help him, get a couple stories published about him in newspapers. Notability here will follow. Carrite (talk) 01:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

    Just wanted to say

    You have created something valuable to everyone on the Internet. I'm sure you get this a lot, but thank you.
    It may sound weird, but Misplaced Pages has helped me through some tough times. We can never thank you enough for this sometimes infighting, sometimes peaceful, sometimes divided, but always united community You are the backbone of the cabal of editors thriving community that is Misplaced Pages. I wish I could give you a BarnMilkyWay but no one's come up with that, apparently. (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 00:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

    Requests for comment/Severe Problems in hewiki

    For the interested. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

    Summary: This document intends to show the problematic situation in Hebrew Misplaced Pages (hewiki), and provide evidence that it has been overtaken by a group of mostly religious and nationalist editors, who prevent others from achieving higher permissions while promoting their own allies. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

    Happy new year

    Good days, Jimbo. I'd like to say that Chinese Misplaced Pages is introducing ARBCOM System currently, since Arbcom on this project, and in fact all the project is originated from the idea of yours, do you have any opinion for that? Any hints, advice or suggestions? -Lemonaka 15:43, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

    Scoop: Heritage Foundation plans to ‘identify and target’ Misplaced Pages editors

    That doesn't sound good. From The Forward. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:37, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

    Being discussed at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (miscellaneous)#Heritage Foundation intending to "identify and target" editors. CMD (talk) 10:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
    Thanks! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
    Also discussed at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel_articles_5/Evidence#Edit_request and Misplaced Pages:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Heritage_Foundation_planning_to_dox_Wikipedia_editors. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

    Jimbo, could I ask you please to respond to these concerns from Tryptofish?

    ... it's not just if you've edited about Israel-Palestine. It could be if you've edited anything about climate and fossil fuels, gender, immigration, vaccines, and of course, American politics. I doubt that they have the bandwidth to actually identify and harass every editor who could possibly be seen as editing information that goes against a MAGA POV, but they will likely find some easily identified targets, whom they will use to "set an example", as a way of instilling fear in our editing community. I fully expect that, in the coming months, Jimbo Wales will be hauled before a hostile and performative Congressional hearing, much in the manner of university presidents. I hope very much that he will be better prepared than Claudine Gay was.
    Yeah, I know this is grim. But I believe the first step in dealing with this is to go into it with our eyes open, to know what we are dealing with, what motivates it. And, more than harming individual editors, the real objective of Heritage et al. is to instill fear in the rest of us. If we become too fearful to revert POV edits, they win. In a very real sense, we have to keep doing what we have been doing, and continue to be a reliable resource for NPOV information. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

    Sita Bose (talk) 05:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

    Well, I fully agree that developments in terms of arguments and actions aimed at destroying trust in knowledge (and of course our specific interest, trust in Misplaced Pages) are extremely worrisome, particularly as I agree that for many who are doing it, the motive does appears to be the undermining of civic norms and democracy. I also agree with Tryptofish in a part that you didn't quote: "In a narrow sense, it's technically true that if you "out" yourself, there's no point in anyone else doing it. But once your identity is known, you become vulnerable to all of the kinds of real-life harassment that doxed people find themselves subjected to. It doesn't matter, in that regard, how they found out your identity." That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face.
    As a side note, I don't think that the reliability of the Heritage Foundation as a source is particularly related to these despicable actions. Whether they should be considered a reliable source in some matters is really unrelated to whether they hate us or not.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 14:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
    Suddenly ANI going to court to get user-data seems like the model of gentlemanly behavior. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
    That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face. Unfortunately, the scales have been inexorably slipping out from beneath the foundation's abilities or willingness to protect its volunteers for my entire wiki-career. There's no balancing force at work. The private equity community has made gadflies out of what we used to label reliable local news media; Alphabet and Meta are actively coopting precision, privacy, and the public domain, while attempting to minimize the effectiveness of good faith actors like Internet Archive. Now suddenly en.wikipedians are facing the sort of personal threats long experienced by volunteers at ru.wiki and zh.wiki. The forces now arrayed against free information don't need to be actively coordinating in order to rapidly bring us to 2+2=5 territory. Any established editor could reasonably see Western culture has been under relentless attack for a long time. Here comes the Heritage Foundation's leaks, hot off Heritage's bangup release of Project 2025, leaking articles through partisan outlets apparently intended to make it appear (in one case) the ADL's recent reliability downgrade at RSNP was anyone else's fault but the ADL's own writings and actions. The news of such activity appears to threaten the community members directly and personally. BusterD (talk) 13:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
    Category: