3,209
edits
Changes
Directory:The Wikipedia Point of View/Peter Damian Evidence (view source)
Revision as of 11:07, 19 September 2008
, 11:07, 19 September 2008→Criticism of FT2
== Criticism of FT2 ==
== Criticism of FT2 ==
* He indulges in long-winded denunciations of other editors in a way that can only escalate hostility. He chokes off any objective editorial discussion with a logorrheic thicket of words that seems designed to confuse. He also obscures or deflects any properly editorial approach to article-building with an interminable invocation of Wikipedia rules and tenets designed to cloak him in an aura of righteousness.
* Tends to personalise all discussion with endless ''ad hominems''
* He does not really understand the basics of neutral editing (although he endlessly claims to). For example, he cites erotic or pornographic websites, self-published sources. Worse, he often misattributes material. Most egregious example of this was when he claimed that the eminent linguist George Lakoff had endorsed [[Neurolinguistic programming]] - a significant and important fact if true, but i he had bothered to check his source, he would have seen that the quote was not by Lakoff. He does not understand the principles of peer review. He imagines the fact that someone is published in the field, or has a doctorate, or is well-known, or has had their writings vetted by somebody else of note, is of itself sufficient to merit inclusion in an article. His understanding of the relative merits of publications is seriously flawed, e.g. when he pointed to journals like the one put out by The International Society for Anthrozoology (which is not a recognised journal - see also the NLP journals). He quotes other authors like Nancy Friday whose work is pure pulp fiction.
* Seems to many others to be agenda driven. (Quote Flavius).
* This manner seems almost deliberately calculated to annoy and infuriate editors with an academic background. His pernicious insistence on absurd and trivialised standards of 'civility' to the exclusion of all editorial or content determined material, is having a deleterious effect on the project.
* He has no real knowledge of the subjects he edits, although he persistently claims to.
"your own editorship absolutely stinks of partiality and POV motivations"
"some editors are so intent on expounding on their subject from a certain angle that for them, making an edit "more neutral" is tantamount to watering it down to suit an agenda of which they themselves may not be fully conscious"
The effect of all this, combined with the important position he holds on Wikipedia, and the reverential awe in which he is held by less knowledgeable and more impressionable administrators, is a malignant and pernicious influence on the project. He has driven off a number of excellent and well-qualified editors. Has gathered around him a group of administrators who hold him in high esteem for his supposed impartiality and neutrality.
== Blocks of Peter Damian ==
== Blocks of Peter Damian ==