1,756
edits
Category talk:Wiki people: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Norms: re
Hoof Hearted (talk | contribs) (→Norms: reply) |
Leucosticte (talk | contribs) (→Norms: re) |
||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
I do think we would be doing a dis-service if we only included people with positive attributes, or only included positive attributes of people whom had negative or indifferent attributes which affected the wiki world. Love these kinds of constructive discussions, keep the creative thoughts flowing! :)))) [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 19:45, 6 May 2014 (UTC) | I do think we would be doing a dis-service if we only included people with positive attributes, or only included positive attributes of people whom had negative or indifferent attributes which affected the wiki world. Love these kinds of constructive discussions, keep the creative thoughts flowing! :)))) [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 19:45, 6 May 2014 (UTC) | ||
:"bad" too is a matter of opinion. E.g., suppose someone says "Mr. X is an admirer of Adolf Hitler". Mr. X might be quite proud of this, and have no problem with the world knowing, but another user might say "We shouldn't attack him like that, by pointing out something others are likely to think badly of him about." | |||
:One could also say, "Mr. X was banned from FooWiki and BarWiki, with 'disruption' cited as the reason." Mr. X might actually want attention drawn to this, because anyone who looks at the history will see that the accusations were unfounded and that his bans were therefore unjustified (on those grounds, anyway). But someone looking at it only superficially might say "This is an attack article that makes it sound like Mr. X has done a lot of bad stuff" when in reality, all it said was that certain actions were taken based on certain allegations. | |||
:Also, some users take pride in disrupting wikis. Some RationalWikians, for instance, delight in editing Conservapedia in ways that are unwelcome there, and in bragging about it on their site. Some Encyclopedia Dramaticans (GNAA, I guess it would be) are the same way about their acts of blatant vandalism. People think they're doing a good deed with their "lulzworthy" disruption, or their interference with the orderly operation of a site that they think is a bad wiki. | |||
:The wikisphere has different norms than other communities; there's more tolerance for pulling pranks and being a pest, because anything can be fairly easily reverted. Therefore, accusations of [[don't be a dick|behaving dickishly]] are not such a big a deal, and I think we need not worry so much about exposing the truth, especially when there are contribution histories to prove what we write. In my opinion, we just shouldn't do total hatchet jobs on the one hand, or glowing PR jobs on the other, in those situations in which the truth is somewhere in the middle. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 20:50, 6 May 2014 (UTC) | |||