User talk:DieWeisseRose

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is DieWeisseRose's talk page.
  • If I, DieWeisseRose, left you a comment on your talk page, please just respond there, not here, so that conversations aren't spread out. Similarly, if you post something here, I will respond here.

Please:

  • Place new comments after existing ones (but within topic sections).
  • Separate topic sections with ==A descriptive header==.
This user talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Sections older than 60 days will be archived.
Section age is determined by the latest timestamp in the individual sections; any section with no timestamps will not be archived by the bot. All sections archived from this page are listed here. This page's archives are split by size. When an archive reaches 256kb, a new archive is created. The current archive is Archive 1. A list of all archives can be found here.
Archive
Archives
List of all archived sections

Old Wernabot Archives

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

[edit] "Wikipedians for Palestine"

Hello. From past postings of yours [1], there is reason to believe you are or were a member of a google group "Wikipedians for Palestine". Since you have also been outspoken recently in your accusations against the pro-Israel "Isra-pedia" group [2], [3]),could I ask you to do the honest thing and provide the Arbcom or some trusted admins with access to the Palestine group archives, so we can get an assessment of what was going on there? Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Did you ever reply to this request? They seem relevant and it would be in the spirit of openness.--72.243.237.122 (talk) 02:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

That group and its archive have been deleted.[4] So, assuming, for the sake of argument only, that I ever had the ability or inclination to give anyone access to the archive, I could not presently do so. Now, I have some questions: Can you, Fut. Perf., honestly say that I was "outspoken" in my alleged "accusations against the pro-Israel 'Isra-pedia' group"? I made only one remark that could possibly be construed as an accusation and that was to point out that there is reason to believe that the CAMERA operation was not unique. Your use of the plural and the adjective are off the mark and my accusation, if any, was, at most, only indirectly aimed at "the pro-Israel 'Isra-pedia' group".

And, again, assuming, for the sake of argument only, that I ever had the ability or inclination to give anyone access to the wikiforpalestine archive, just how would giving non-members access to it be the "honest thing"? Was joining the CAMERA group under, apparently, false pretenses and, then, leaking the group's e-mails to EI the "honest thing"?

And just what is the purpose of this line of inquiry? Here's the group's description from a Google cache:

This group is for experienced Wikipedians actively working to combat anti-Palestinian and pro-Zionist bias in the English language version of Wikipedia. It is not the purpose of this group to introduce a POV bias into Wikipedia; however, this group is for those who are consciously and proudly pro-Palestinian even as they are committed to, and work for, an NPOV.

In order to verify their status as both a Wikipedian in good standing and someone who is pro-Palestinian and anti-Zionist, those wishing to join this group will be asked to provide their Wikipedia user ID.

The neutral point of view is a means of dealing with conflicting views. The policy requires that, where there are or have been conflicting views, these are fairly presented, but not asserted. All significant points of view are presented, not just the most popular one. It is not asserted that the most popular view or some sort of intermediate view among the different views is the correct one. Readers are left to form their own opinions. --From the Wikipedia policy on "Neutral point of view"

Huldra provided another statement from the wikiforpalestine group:

In light of the recent CAMERA/Isra-pedia scandal [] and seeing that Dajudem/Juanita wants to compare this group to the CAMERA/Isra-pedia effort she was involved in let us point out some key differences:

  • 1. This group never recruited neophytes to edit Wikipedia; only editors already in "good standing" were allowed to join.
  • 2. Unlike the Isra-pedia group, the existence of this group has never been hidden. It has always been public and purposely so (Yahoo does permit "unlisted" groups).
  • 3. Unlike the Isra-pedia effort, this group has always been explicitly committed to NPOV.
  • 4. This group has always been independent and never bankrolled and backed by any organization, let alone one as well staffed and funded as CAMERA.
  • 5. This last point may help explain why Isra-pedia had more message traffic in one week than this group had in the last seven months.

Just what policy/guideline did the wikiforpalestine group or its members allegedly ever violate? Unless you can reasonably articulate some alleged violation and provide some evidence then I would politely request that you simply AGF and abandon this apparent fishing expedition in the making. --DieWeisseRose (talk) 11:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)