Talk:Wikipedian

• Where does he cite this :)--Etenne (talk) 16:50, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed for deletion

Honestly, I am not comfortable with these entries about Wikipedia editors on BoyWiki and even though they may be antis... I think it shows a certain level of pettiness and I would like you to consider deleting them. Even though they might not accord us the same courtesy, I feel we are above this sort of thing. It really is not relevant to BL culture or heritage. I feel a better approach if you feel strongly about this subject is adding them as a part of the Wikipedia page. --Etenne (talk) 17:11, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

The goal is not really to denounce or shame them but to make it easier to track their activities, find useful content, and be aware of what they're about if we encounter them; also it's important to document the major players in order to tell the story of how Wikipedia ended up being what it is now. When we look at an old deletion debate, for instance, it's helpful to know the background behind the people who are commenting in various ways. Lysander (talk) 18:41, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Still couldn't this be added to the entry on Wikipedia? Also, I do not feel we should use their real names as their Wikipedia user names is enough. --Etenne (talk) 18:57, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree that it suffices to use their Wikipedia name. There should at least be a redirect from the username to the article where the information can be found. Lysander (talk) 19:31, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes that's fine, just not his real name and it needs to be a section within the Wikipedia entry for people like that because the are simply not significant enough to merit their own page. However, if he goes on a killing spree ect... I would reconsider at that time. --Etenne (talk) 19:34, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

You know what I mean: as it is, this guy is barely a footnote in BL history. I personally would rather hear a good love story then about this jerk:) --Etenne (talk) 19:53, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

It seems like I ran into this guy a lot on Wikipedia, or at least saw his name pop up in histories and in debates. I think love stories sometimes become tragedies because of some antagonist, kinda like in The Count of Monte Cristo. The tragedies and the antagonists who cause the stories to go in tragic directions are noteworthy too, maybe even more so because we learn more from failures (whether our own or humanity's) than from our successes. I think the direction Wikipedia went in with regard to kicking off pedophiles and their sympathizers was kinda tragic, because there was so much potential. Lysander (talk) 20:07, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Ahh, but there's the rub. He is only a villain in the small world of Wikipedia (which is where he should remain and where this entry belongs). I think you are giving him too much credit and too much power. In the long run, he is insignificant and best forgotten. --Etenne (talk) 20:21, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

However, if you want to write about true villains of our time, you could write about those who burned Edward Brongersma's library.... in that case, I am sure you are free to cite names.While I wouldn't put it up there with the burning of the great library at Alexandria, it's certinally more significant then this guy.--Etenne (talk) 20:29, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia a small world? It's pretty high on List of most popular websites. It's like the United Nations or any of these global task forces that bring together ministers of justice and the interior to talk about child protection policy. These organizations and informal summits don't have power to throw anyone in prison directly, but they have a lot of soft power. They influence policies that lead to people serving prison time. The average person, when looking for facts about an issue, will google and then find a Wikipedia article. That in turn will impact what opinions he may form and what arguments he may bring up in debates/discussions. A large part of the purpose of sites such as BoyWiki is arguably to provide a staging ground for information that may eventually be transferred into Wikipedia articles.

Tertiary sources are important. Wikipedia in particular is central to the wikisphere, and a wiki looking to start an initial article on a topic (e.g. child sexual abuse) will often begin by copying some or all of the Wikipedia page. Reporters too rely on Wikipedia sometimes to get a general overview of a topic. Its influences are subtle sometimes but they're there. Lysander (talk) 20:41, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Frankly, I still do not think that this guy or that Alison‎ person merits there own page on BoyWiki and should just be added as a section to the entry on Wikipedia. --Etenne (talk) 20:53, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

That's fine. A merge is acceptable. Lysander (talk) 20:55, 15 March 2015 (UTC)