Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians for encyclopedic merit/Members

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please only edit this page to add or remove yourself. Feel free to explain what aspect of the project you are interested in helping with, or what your concerns are. All Wikipedians are welcome to add themselves to this list.

  1. 172.129.100.71 I have restored my membership, and would prefer it not be removed again.
  2. Audiovideo I believe that every edit which removes bad or damaging content from Wikipedia is a good thing even though it is censorship. I also believe that the large number of editors who have an knee-jerk reaction against censorship are exposing their POV, and that they are helping the few editors who are turning Wikipedia into a pornography gallery rather than something which will be useful at work and school.
  3. Banes
    AC/1887
    AC/1887
  4. brenneman(t)(c) Can we start with a merit system for WikiProjects?
  5. Cathytreks-Talk I too shall be glad to assist in helping to develop a standard of thoughful concensus building which shall not impose new censorship standards on the Wikipedia, save those self imposed ones that lay within ourselves. While the concept of "decency" may be POV on its face still, there should be some basic standard of decency that a community should strive to abide by, lest we suffer that result, which would undoubtedly be ...total anarchy.
  6. Coqsportif Can never have enough decency.
  7. Erwin no place for porno on wikipedia.
  8. FCYTravis I am highly interested in developing a standard which says there shall be no new standards or censorship imposed on Wikipedia, as the entire concept of "decency" is POV on its face. I shall be glad to assist reaching such a goal.
  9. Gator1 I hope this makes Wikipedia better. I am an attorney, so if my legal expertise can be of any help, please let me know.
  10. Gibadabmoob - I am a member, I will work to make this project what it should be Wikipedians for NPOV.
  11. Gorgonzilla Did I mention I worked on the architecture of PICS?
  12. Hipocrite Nothing more important than merit!
  13. Johntex I'm interested in helping us stay within the law. I'm also interested in making this the best encyclopedia possible for the largest possible number of people. That will require compromises and consensus-building about what is appropriate for an individual situation, and not a blind knee-jerk reaction like "all nudity is bad" or "don't ever let the prudes remove any nudity".
  14. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters I would like to help WP create a set of voluntary annotations which avoid comstockery.
  15. MONGO
  16. Mysidia Encyclopedic merit of Wikipedia's choices for articles and media for inclusion is an excellent goal.
  17. Ngb as an observer to any attempt to impose arbitrary standards of 'obscenity' and 'decency' on Wikipedia in opposition to WP:NPOV.
  18. User:Purplefeltangel/sig 03:51, 23 October 2005 (UTC) (User has left the project, userpage and sig have been deleted...) -[[User:Mysekurity|Mysekurity]] [[additions | e-mail]] 19:34, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
  19. Voice of All (Talk)|(Esperanza) Now that you guys has cleared up some of the vaguery your mission, and since there are some needless shocking images around here(autofellatio [cough]...), I don't mind being a part of this organization.
  20. Zoe Readding my membership which MONGO had no business removing.
  21. Kinneyboy90, I'm the infamous founder of the AMW, and though my association will be deleted, I have opted to become a member of this project, to further my agenda, because this may be much more effective. I hope it grows!
  22. Mysekurity (talk • contribs • logs) I've been meaning to join for a while, thus, I am doing so now
  23. Samboy. I have had a page about my views on this issue up for a while: User:Samboy/Offensive.
  24. jelsa tris I am documentary journalist, and a firm believer in standards of writing, as well as balancing those standards with the need to record events and the truth of subjects. I also feel that every subject can be covered in a way that is neither biased nor obscene, and works that are merely stand as evidence of careless work and ineptitude.
  25. Ursasapien I agree completely with Jelsa tris. Biased and/or obscene articles are just sloppy work.