User:Spaceclerk

Wikipedia is dying a slow death, choking on its own wastes. It's being killed by people like the "PeterWibdibbleMnpls" I reference below, using every kind of wikilawyering just as long as it's her very specific - and, let me mention, bigoted - subjective viewpoint that prevails, facts be damned.

Welcome to Me
Just a quick note here. Despite the increasingly ludicrous claims by e.g. someone currently losing the ARBCOM election: never banned under any account, never blocked under any account, and never cowed by tinpots who would rather manufacture such bogus claims and argue personalities than facts. Facts such as:

Holocaust denial controversy
The British anti-racist organization Hope not Hate has listed Israel Shamir as a "notable Holocaust denier," citing the "rabid Holocaust denial material" on his website. In 2006, discussing the upcoming Iranian International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust, Deutsche Welle wrote that the Iranian government "said it intended to invite academics such as German neo-Nazi Horst Mahler and the Israeli journalist and Christian convert Israel Shamir, both of whom are Holocaust deniers." Shamir has stated in an interview, "I think it is every Muslim's and Christian's duty to deny the Holocaust, to reject this belief, just as Abraham and Moses rejected the idols. Any person who confesses to God should deny the Holocaust." The wide-spread acceptance of the historicity of the Holocaust, he argues, shows "that the mass media machine is well integrated and concentrated in philosemitic, mostly Jewish hands. The occupation of Palestine by Jews is painful, but it is not more harmful than this captivity of free discourse."

And some ruminations
The plain reading of WP:OUTING says that it is not 'outing' to reveal information an editor has already revealed on Wikipedia. What this means, for example, is that if someone has as their user name, say, 'PeterWibdibbleMnpls' there would be nothing wrong with suggesting interested editors google 'Peter Wibdibble Minneapolis.' And if PeterWibdibbleMnpls routinely got into Wikipedia battles about, let us say, Italians, consistently taking one side of the argument, there would be nothing 'outing' with suggesting editors google, say, 'Peter Wibdibble Minneapolis Italians' to see whether anything interesting - or even, dare I say it, routinely anti-Italian - comes up. And if those things were troubling enough routinely enough, such editors might even suggest, out loud, that perhaps Peter Wibdibble of Minneapolis has sufficient issues there that it might be best for him step away from editing articles on Italian topics.

All completely hypothetical, of course.

Spaceclerk (talk) 00:15, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

And another rumination
Suppose (entirely hypothetically, of course) that it also turns out that a top-ten talk-radio host and author of a #1 best seller - let's call him Niels Bohrs, or Navy Boats, or Real Quartz, or something - has personally called Peter Wibdibble of Minneapolis "blatantly anti-Italian" in an essay posted on his website, including the text "Who is Peter Wibdibble" and saying - after quoting a huge chunk of anti-Italian rhetoric from Peter Wibdibble - "I can't express how proud I am to have someone like", oh, say, Peter Wibdibble "opposing my appearance before the", oh, say, Barbershop Quartet "convention." Mentioning this wouldn't at all be WP:OUTING, because none of it is information which is neither publicly available nor given freely by PeterWibdibbleMnpls's very own account name.

It would certainly make people a lot less tolerant of Peter Wibdibble's attempts to hijack a page about, say, Italian control of the (olive) press, wouldn't it. Kinda has permanent topic ban stamped all over it, doesn't it.