[WikiEN-l] Can we ban 172 now? And VV too! (in response to Fred Bauder)

Wed Jun 2 20:13:00 UTC 2004

I am very sorry to hear that 172 is considering leaving the project.  I am 
also disturbed by the nature of this discussion.

To be clear, I myself have had frustrating, caustic, and even exasperating 
arguments over edits with 172 myself.  I do not always find his 
presentation of self to be very congenial, although I am in no position to 
throw stones.  Nevertheless, I am convinced of the integrity of his 
historical research, and his sincerity in applying the standards of sound 
scholarship to Wikipedia.  while we are not and ought not to be constrained 
by the limits of conventional encyclopedias and scholarly research, 
academic historians are people who dedicate the better part of their lives 
to learning about and understanding events.  In my experience they 
generally hold themselves to high standards, and I think Wikipedia can 
benefit from those standards and the work of such historians.  In these 
terms 172 has made many valuable contributions.

It disturbs me that some -- I think VV, Fred, Stan and perhaps others -- 
characterize this as a right/left argument.  Even they understand that 172 
himself sees it as a scholar/non-scholar argument.  I have gone over the 
articles in question and I think that this is indeed the root issue.  Of 
course, many people in the US (and perhaps other countries) sees the 
difference between academia and non-academia in terms of politics (scholars 
are liberal or Marxist), but I do not think this is constructive.

Every Soviet scholar understands that Stalin played a key role in many 
awful things, involving millions of deaths.  I don't think 172 has ever 
denied this.  I do, however, think that he has tried to establish a 
framework for understanding Soviet history that is grounded in scholarly 
research and not just Cold War rhetoric.  My sense is that anyone who has 
studied history at the graduate level (although I am sure this is true of 
many non-scholars too!) has had to slog through now only huge amounts of 
historical material, but some pretty complicated historical debates.  Of 
course in the process one learns just how bad things were in the Soviet 
Union, especially during certain periods and for particular groups of 
people.  But academic historians have to go beyond just saying "SU = bad" 
or "Stalin = bad" to say something more insightful about how and why 
whatever happened happened.  I think 172's contributions have been informed 
by this concern, and I think some people here systematically misunderstand it.

Steve

Steven L. Rubenstein
Associate Professor
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Bentley Annex
Ohio University
Athens, Ohio 45701
-------------- next part --------------

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.690 / Virus Database: 451 - Release Date: 5/22/2004