Jump to content

User talk:Sue Gardner: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
EdwardsBot (talk | contribs)
354,693 edits
Line 1,253: Line 1,253:
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">'''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]''' &middot; [[Wikipedia:Signpost/Single|Single-page]] &middot; [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]] &middot; [[User:EdwardsBot|EdwardsBot]] ([[User talk:EdwardsBot|talk]]) 13:24, 28 December 2010 (UTC)</div>
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">'''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]''' &middot; [[Wikipedia:Signpost/Single|Single-page]] &middot; [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]] &middot; [[User:EdwardsBot|EdwardsBot]] ([[User talk:EdwardsBot|talk]]) 13:24, 28 December 2010 (UTC)</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0095 -->
<!-- EdwardsBot 0095 -->

== Failure of ArbCom to block pro-paedophila advocate when notified ==

Sue, before I get into the rather serious subject of my message, let me first wish you a happy new year and congratulate you on another very successful fund raising campaign.

Some people believe that the internet is full of paedophiles looking to pounce upon unsuspecting children. I am not one of those people. It is unlikely that Wikipedia would be a very fruitful place for those looking to contact children, yet common sense suggests that we should ensure that Wikipedia is not used for pro-paedophilia advocacy. Experience has shown us that it has been done before and remains a temptation to those who wish to push their ideology, although this is hardly exclusive to paedophilia.

I was disappointed to learn that ArbCom members did not act when notified of an editor engaging in pro-paedophilia advocacy on English Wikipedia. This editor is quite easily identified off-wiki, where they have openly stated that they are a member of NAMBLA, among other things.

My understanding of the situation is that individual ArbCom members were notified of the situation but either outright refused to act or failed to respond at all. Several weeks later, a message was sent to the general ArbCom email, as advised by WP:CHILDPROTECT. The editor in question was blocked a day or so later on English Wikipedia, but remains unblocked on the other WMF projects to which they have contributed. I think it would be an obvious and sensible policy to globally lock the accounts of anyone blocked for these types of activities, don't you?

I would like to make two suggestions to improve our handling of similar situations in the future. First, any ArbCom member who receives notification of pro-paedophilia advocacy should forward it to the larger ArbCom group for review (if they choose not to act on it themselves). Second, ArbCom members who place such blocks should request that the accounts be globally locked as a standard part of the process.

You have made public statements which support the principles underlying the WP:CHILDPROTECT policy on English Wikipedia, so I hope you understand that the purpose of this message is not to shame individual ArbCom members but to suggest that we need to find ways to deal with similar situations more effectively.

Regards,
Delicious carbuncle

(mailed and posted)
[[User:Delicious carbuncle|Delicious carbuncle]] ([[User talk:Delicious carbuncle|talk]]) 23:04, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:04, 1 January 2011

Looks like you've never been welcomed! :-(

Welcome!

Hello, Sue Gardner, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Cbrown1023 talk 15:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for being part of Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly

all the files are now online - and thanks again for coming along for a chat... whether you were vocal, or more of a listener, your support is fantastic - and do consider hosting a skypecast of your own before too long! (I think I pressed all of three buttons this time!) - once again thanks, and I look forward to seeing you around! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 03:18, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow very impressive to hear the big cheese herself talking to us on the NTWW. It was very interesting and very exciting.--Filll (talk) 02:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some Dutch happening

Dear mrs. Gardner, may I draw your attention to some trouble, recently spoken of on the Help-page: [1] and [2]. → With great respect and kind regards from: 86.83.155.44 (talk) 09:34, 25 June 2008 (UTC) D.A. Borgdorff, retired IEE PEng.[reply]

In addition: I have tried to warn you in time about growing explosive situation with possible consequences of press releases. Meanwhile I contacted Cary Bass as well, who responded to me for dealing matters. Sincerely yours: D.A. Borgdorff editing via 86.83.155.44 (talk) 08:49, 28 June 2008 (UTC) PS: Meanwhile further strange developments are evolving as was expected. Respectfully: D.A. Borgdorff = 86.83.155.44 (talk) 14:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
See also: here and there. High esteem from D.A. Borgdorff - MASc E.E. by 86.83.155.44 (talk) 14:58, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your note, D.A. Borgdorff. I'm sorry you're having trouble, but I'm afraid there's nothing I can do to help you. As Cary said, if you're having a disagreement with the Dutch Wikimedia community, you will need to resolve it with them directly. I wish you good luck. Sue Gardner (talk) 22:52, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll herewith like to really "contrathank" you again for your attention, because in my opinion it looks absurd to being stalked everywhere on the wiki's around the globe in a 60+ aged condition ... (some of letters will do). Greetings though from dAb with:86.83.155.44 (talk) 00:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC) I did want to take your idea into practice, but unfortunately I'm immediately blocked-up again, apart from ca 3 months in NL (by persecution) on many others too, even till finishing touch on metaW. So I can't reach nobody anymore there. I'll remain much obliged faithfully yours: D.A. Borgdorff by 86.83.155.44 (talk) 18:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SF Meetup #8

  In the area? You're invited to
   San Francisco Meetup # 8
  Date: November 8th, 2008
  Time: 2PM
  Place: Metacafe, Palo Alto, California
  prev: Meetup 7 - next: Meetup 9
You received this invite because you added your name to the Invite list. If you don't wish to be invited any more, simply remove your name. Thanks. --ShakataGaNai ^_^ 18:28, 31 October 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Bangalore Wikipedian

Happened to see this, letting you know that I am from Bangalore India. -- Tinu Cherian - 14:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year 2009

Happy New Year Sue Gardner!!!! I wish for you and your family to have a wonderful 2009!!! Have fun partying and may you make many edits!!!

-RavichandarMy coffee shop 11:59, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost — February 23, 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:

The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 20:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 01:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


The Wikipedia Signpost  — 16 March 2009

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 23 March 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 30 March 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:51, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 April 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 19:48, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 13 April 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 16:59, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 April 2009

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:54, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 11 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 18 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 13:37, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 25 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:14, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 1 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 23:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 15 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 12:21, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 22 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 July 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:39, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 July 2009

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 13:09, 28 July 2009 (UTC) [reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 3 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 06:24, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 10 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 05:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 17 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:24, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 24 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 06:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 September 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 September 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 October 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 October 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 October 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 October 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 November 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 November 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 16 November 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 23 November 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 30 November 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 December 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 December 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 December 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 December 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 January 2010

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Sue Gardner! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 751 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. Larry Biddle - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 11 January 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 18 January 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 25 January 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 February 2010

SF Meetup #11

  In the area? You're invited to
   San Francisco Meetup # 11
  Date: Saturday, February 6th, 2010
  Time: 15:00 (3PM)
  Place: WMFoundation offices
  prev: Meetup 10 - next: Meetup 12

This is posted to the groups by request. Please sign up on the Invite list for future announcements. Thanks. --ShakataGaNai ^_^ 23:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC) [reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 February 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 February 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 February 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 March 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 March 2010

March is U.S. Women's History Month

National Women's History Project's 2010 Theme is "Writing Women Back into History" and I think that is a good reminder that Wikipedia English has quite a few gaps in our coverage of articles about women.

Since the first of March, I've been creating and expanding articles related to women and came across Carol Sutton who caught my attention because the reason for her notability is her trailblazing work as a female journalist and editor.

Sutton faced systemic bias in her newspaper but addressed it head on by changing the "Women's World" section to the "Today's Living" section to cover substantive news stories about issues that women would find of interest. She became the first woman to be a Managing Editor of a major newspaper. Her writings about her experience as a journalist are thought provoking (at least to me :-).

Kimberly Wilmot Voss has been blogging about her over the past year. [3] Evidently she is publishing a piece about her to come out this spring. I'm looking forward to seeing it.

As we move forward into "2010s", and make plans the next decade for Wikimedia and Wikipedia, I think it is good value to look back at the experience of the women that broke the glass ceiling. FloNight♥♥♥♥ 00:12, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 March 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 March 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 29 March 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 April 2010

Articles for deletion nomination of Noticiero Digital

I have nominated Noticiero Digital, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noticiero Digital. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Peter Ian Staker (talk) 06:19, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 April 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 April 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 April 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 3 May 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 10 May 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 17 May 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 24 May 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 31 May 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 June 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 June 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 June 2010

Zero-tolerance policy towards pedophilia

Sue, I read in the news that you said that Wikipedia "has a long-held, zero-tolerance policy towards pedophilia or pedophilia advocacy and child pornography". We at our organization are interested in adopting a similar policy. Would you be kind enough to point me toward this Wikipedia policy? The closest thing I could find after many minutes of searching was Wikipedia:Protecting children's privacy; however, that page clearly says that it "is not a policy or guideline", only an essay. I have similarly searched WikimediaFoundation.org for "zero tolerance", but there is nothing; as there is likewise nothing about pedophilia. There is also nothing on Meta Wikimedia about "zero tolerance" and pedophilia. -- Calling Occupants (talk) 13:47, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 June 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 July 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 July 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 July 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 July 2010

Best Advertisement of first half of 2010

Sue, we here at the Cable Ad Bureau wish to congratulate you as the winner of our informal "Best Ad" award for the first six months of 2010. Your commercial spot found here bested a tough field of competitors. In the end, we felt that your ability to push through the Wikimedia Foundation's message without any hint of journalistic objectivity creeping into the piece was what put this advert over the top. Congratulations! -- 72.43.107.130 (talk) 19:45, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 August 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 August 2010

The Signpost: 16 August 2010

The Signpost: 23 August 2010

The Signpost: 30 August 2010

The Signpost: 6 September 2010

The Signpost: 13 September 2010

The Signpost: 20 September 2010

The Signpost: 27 September 2010

The Signpost: 4 October 2010

The Signpost: 11 October 2010

The Signpost: 18 October 2010

The Signpost: 25 October 2010

The Signpost: 1 November 2010

The Signpost: 8 November 2010

The Signpost: 15 November 2010

The Signpost: 22 November 2010

The Signpost: 29 November 2010

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

The Signpost: 27 December 2010

Failure of ArbCom to block pro-paedophila advocate when notified

Sue, before I get into the rather serious subject of my message, let me first wish you a happy new year and congratulate you on another very successful fund raising campaign.

Some people believe that the internet is full of paedophiles looking to pounce upon unsuspecting children. I am not one of those people. It is unlikely that Wikipedia would be a very fruitful place for those looking to contact children, yet common sense suggests that we should ensure that Wikipedia is not used for pro-paedophilia advocacy. Experience has shown us that it has been done before and remains a temptation to those who wish to push their ideology, although this is hardly exclusive to paedophilia.

I was disappointed to learn that ArbCom members did not act when notified of an editor engaging in pro-paedophilia advocacy on English Wikipedia. This editor is quite easily identified off-wiki, where they have openly stated that they are a member of NAMBLA, among other things.

My understanding of the situation is that individual ArbCom members were notified of the situation but either outright refused to act or failed to respond at all. Several weeks later, a message was sent to the general ArbCom email, as advised by WP:CHILDPROTECT. The editor in question was blocked a day or so later on English Wikipedia, but remains unblocked on the other WMF projects to which they have contributed. I think it would be an obvious and sensible policy to globally lock the accounts of anyone blocked for these types of activities, don't you?

I would like to make two suggestions to improve our handling of similar situations in the future. First, any ArbCom member who receives notification of pro-paedophilia advocacy should forward it to the larger ArbCom group for review (if they choose not to act on it themselves). Second, ArbCom members who place such blocks should request that the accounts be globally locked as a standard part of the process.

You have made public statements which support the principles underlying the WP:CHILDPROTECT policy on English Wikipedia, so I hope you understand that the purpose of this message is not to shame individual ArbCom members but to suggest that we need to find ways to deal with similar situations more effectively.

Regards, Delicious carbuncle

(mailed and posted) Delicious carbuncle (talk) 23:04, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sue_Gardner&oldid=405394879"