4 ms·

One of Cross' targets attempted to edit his page and his changes were quickly reverted by Cross due to conflict of interest. What it seems you're suggesting her

by k1m 8y ago

One of Cross' targets attempted to edit his page and his changes were quickly reverted by Cross due to conflict of interest. What it seems you're suggesting here is that those unfairly targeted on Wikipedia, as Cross is doing, should learn the labyrinthine processes Wikipedia expects to correct their entries. And then presumably to put in the same amount of time Cross is putting in (hours and hours on weekdays and weekends) to monitor their pages for more abuses from him. Should we not be more concerned about blocking those who are clearly in the wrong here?

tptacek 8y ago
Which BLP page are you referring to here? I don't see it in the article we're talking about. (I believe you, I just don't know what you're talking about). I don't know what "clearly in the wrong" means. Cross and I don't share a POV; from the little I know about him (exclusively: this article) I find his politics noxious. But I would be extremely disturbed if my opinion about his politics somehow controlled Wikipedia.
- k1m 8y ago
  See: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Piers_Robinson&type=revision&diff=840417662&oldid=840090450 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Piers_Robinson&ty... and https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Piers_Robinson&type=revision&diff=840418411&oldid=840417662 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Piers_Robinson&ty... I'm not suggesting anyone base the block on their opinion of his politics, but of his behaviour on Wikipedia. There's clearly a conflict of interest when someone who is openly hostile toward someone else and taunts them on Twitter, then goes and makes the kind of edits he's making to their Wikipedia page. There's of course a bigger issue of how Wikipedia deals with this problem more broadly. But the fact that they're unwilling to act on a single editor whose actions have been exposed doesn't inspire much confidence.

by k1m 8y ago

tptacek 8y ago

Which BLP page are you referring to here? I don't see it in the article we're talking about. (I believe you, I just don't know what you're talking about). I don't know what "clearly in the wrong" means. Cross and I don't share a POV; from the little I know about him (exclusively: this article) I find his politics noxious. But I would be extremely disturbed if my opinion about his politics somehow controlled Wikipedia.

k1m 8y ago
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Piers_Robinson&type=revision&diff=840417662&oldid=840090450 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Piers_Robinson&ty... and https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Piers_Robinson&type=revision&diff=840418411&oldid=840417662 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Piers_Robinson&ty... I'm not suggesting anyone base the block on their opinion of his politics, but of his behaviour on Wikipedia. There's clearly a conflict of interest when someone who is openly hostile toward someone else and taunts them on Twitter, then goes and makes the kind of edits he's making to their Wikipedia page. There's of course a bigger issue of how Wikipedia deals with this problem more broadly. But the fact that they're unwilling to act on a single editor whose actions have been exposed doesn't inspire much confidence.