5 ms·
It was proposed to the English Wikipedia community (late yesterday) and as of now I don't think we have consensus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Villa
by neilk 15y ago
It was proposed to the English Wikipedia community (late yesterday) and as of now I don't think we have consensus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Participation_in_anti-SOPA_and_anti-PIPA_protests_by_blacking_out_the_Wikipedia_logo_for_one_day_.28TOMORROW.2C_NOV._16th.29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposa...
By my reckoning, so far at least half the commenters think this would break the "Neutral Point of View" policy. I personally disagree with that, but as an employee of the WMF it's not my place to tell them what to do.
- chc 15y agoWikipedia editors have to be one of the most frustrating groups I've ever encountered. They typically have all the charm and practicality of a government bureaucracy without the helpfulness. It's like there's a competition among them to find some way the rules can be interpreted as banning anything anybody suggests.
- gbelote 15y agoWas the Italian protest something voted for by the community?
- neilk 15y agoIt was agreed upon by the community of the Italian Wikipedia. http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bar/Discussioni/Comma_29_e_Wikipedia http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bar/Discussioni/Comma... Note: the Wikipedia community does not usually put things to a vote. They discuss and seek consensus. Although they sometimes do use icons to indicate their position and to get a rough sense of where everyone stands.
- compman775 15y agoIf this law really is bad, why would it be a problem for Wikipedia to not be neutral about it?
- gojomo 15y agoI think the bill is awful. I think WMF is right to stand against it. But for Wikipedia itself, either you're committed to the duty of remaining neutral, even on important issues and issues with overwhelming sentiment on one side, or you're not.