[WikiEN-l] Two Comments on the Siegenthaler Situation

Tue Dec 6 02:18:16 UTC 2005

I watched the CNN interview that Siegenthaler and Jimbo appeared on.  
There was considerable emphasis on bad material still being in  
history despite it being removed from the article itself. I don't  
think it is unreasonable to remove clearly false material from  
history when specifically asked.

In this particular case after Jimbo assuring Siegenthaler that the  
history would be cleansed, it would not do to not do so. Sometimes  
you must simply accept the consequences of whatever your spokesman said.

In the general case, most articles have something plainly wrong in  
them, but that is simply the nature of a wiki.

Fred

On Dec 5, 2005, at 6:57 PM, Snowspinner wrote:

> 1: If we are going to begin protecting pages because of news  
> coverage (Which is not unreasonable at all), we should have a  
> protected template that makes that clear. After all, the first page  
> people hit is also a place where they are going to want to try to  
> edit - it's important to take those people and invite them to look  
> at other pages. I've created [[Template:P-protected]] for this.
>
> 2: I understand the need to remove the Siegenthaler libel from the  
> page history. On the other hand, I think A) It is a matter of  
> important historical record at this point, and B) It sets an  
> unseemly precedent. Can we move the deleted history out of that  
> article and into an archive page, perhaps with a permanant front  
> page that notes what it is, and that it is a collection of vandalism?
>
> -Phil Sandifer
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>