User talk:Andreyi
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] 9/11 wiki
Hi Cool Cat. I see you filed bugzilla:7280 to get the 9/11 wiki closed down, but the devs are stalling again. The way I see it, there are several different levels of action, ranging from locking the wiki and leaving it up as a read-only database, to totally deleting it and all the data on it. The question is, which option do the majority of those who have voted for something to be done (themselves an overwhelming majority) favor? Here are the main options as I see them:
- Lock the database and make the wiki read-only, but leave it up there for everyone to read indefinitely. This is definitely better than the status quo, whereby the wiki is described by many of the voters in the latest poll as a "vandal's playground", "troll magnet" etc.
- Archive the content and get rid of the wiki. There seems to be a lot of support for this. If implemented, this would mean that anyone trying to visit the site would get a 404 or a notice directing them to somewhere where they could download the archive. The Wikimedia Foundation would make the content available for download for others to make use of under the GFDL.
- Delete the whole thing and don't even bother making an archive available. This would be as much as we could do to dissociate Wikipedia's good name from such an embarrassment as the 9/11 wiki. MemoryWiki has apparently got the content already, so actually the information wouldn't be lost at all.
From Bugzilla I see that Brion has unilaterally decided, seemingly regardless of the wishes of the community, that he won't delete it unless there's a legal problem. In that case it might be much less of a struggle to just get him to make it read only, but really from a content preservation point of view, if you're going to do that you might as well shut down the wiki and make its database available as a download. Looking at the vote, I can see a lot of people, many of them well-respected and famous Wikipedians such as Angela, calling for the wiki to be "archived", "closed", "removed", "deleted" or "gone". I think the consensus would definitely support something more than just locking the database. It's not so much that people want the work that people have contributed to the 9/11 wiki undone (although the vast majority is useless, as it has never become more than a dumping ground), but that they don't want it associated with Wikipedia, which is supposed to be all about NPOV, accuracy, factual material, etc. At the very least it needs to lose that old Wikipedia logo, so that no readers can be under the impression that such an embarrassment is part of Wikipedia. It would be great if you could reply to Brion over on Bugzilla with some definite proposal of what he should do, where the consensus for such an action would be clear from the vote that's been held on Meta, as well as all the other endless discussions, so that he could go ahead and do it. I just wish him or the board, who seem so remote from the community these days, could read the polls and discussions, or even just the comments I've made here, and see that this nonsense has gone on far too long. Thanks a lot and all the best. Andreyi 16:50, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- 9/11 wiki had always been intended to be the dumpspace of non encyclopedic 9/11 stuff that just was plauging wikipedia at its infant stages. Since the "threat" has passed it can be sent to wiki-hell/heaven/afterlife/ragnorak/(whatever).
- Devs generaly try to avoid drasric actions. There are a number of reasons and I am not going to get indulged with it. He is just being careful.
- I guess the issue should be taken to the board, after all this will be the first time a wiki will be deleted/closed.
- --Cat out 17:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with you and I know Brion is just being careful, but I think it needs pointing out to him that there is a community consensus, expressed many times in many places, for at the very least locking the database and changing the name and logo. I hope you'll at least point this out on Bugzilla and direct Brion to some of the discussions such as this one and the meta vote, because I seem to be unable to sign up for an account over there. Thanks. Andreyi 17:13, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- Brion has me on ignore on IRC so I'd rather not even talk to him right now. Ignoring him back seems to be the most constructive thing I feel I can do. You are however welcome to post anything on bugzilla. --Cat out 17:50, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with you and I know Brion is just being careful, but I think it needs pointing out to him that there is a community consensus, expressed many times in many places, for at the very least locking the database and changing the name and logo. I hope you'll at least point this out on Bugzilla and direct Brion to some of the discussions such as this one and the meta vote, because I seem to be unable to sign up for an account over there. Thanks. Andreyi 17:13, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
