Roth is an elderly man googling

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
21 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Roth is an elderly man googling

Kathleen McCook
Fred, you say" Roth is an elderly man googling" and I am wondering if there
is an age at which people using Wikipedia in the estimation of this list
become unfit to drive?
Roth is an active writer and renowned, Nobel Prize finalist...right this
moment..to dismiss him as  "an elderly man googling" underscores why there
may be intergenerational unease on this enterprise. Show respect.This
comment that "Roth is an elderly man googling is spiteful and not a valid
point.

On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Fred Bauder <[hidden email]> wrote:

> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-19527797
> >
> > "Author Roth rebukes Wikipedia over Human Stain edit"
> >
> > "Following the publication of the New Yorker letter, the Wikipedia
> > entry was changed and a section noting the debate inserted near its
> > end."
> >
> > Has this been mentioned on any other mailing lists?
> >
> > I noticed that the article makes the (very common) error/assumption
> > that administrators exercise some sort of editorial control, when (in
> > principle), it is editors that exercise editorial control (when the
> > editorial process works, that is). Do those dealing with Wikipedia
> > publicity ever try and correct this misunderstanding, or is it
> > near-impossible to get the distinction across to journalists?
> >
> > Carcharoth
>
> Roth is an elderly man googling, see
>
>
> http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2012/09/internet-stain-philip-roth-wikipedia-entry/56646/
>
> Our current content seems appropriate.
>
> Fred
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Fred Bauder-2
> Fred, you say" Roth is an elderly man googling" and I am wondering if
> there
> is an age at which people using Wikipedia in the estimation of this list
> become unfit to drive?
> Roth is an active writer and renowned, Nobel Prize finalist...right this
> moment..to dismiss him as  "an elderly man googling" underscores why
> there
> may be intergenerational unease on this enterprise. Show respect.This
> comment that "Roth is an elderly man googling is spiteful and not a valid
> point.

I'm older than he is. Roth is not the the first celebrity to think he
could dictate Wikipedia content. Michael Moore also felt he could throw
his weight around. And, no, I don't respect that move. Instead of
spending decades on line they wrote books and produced documentaries;
they are Noobies here regardless of their accomplishments elsewhere;
crying babies squalling and throwing their rattles.

Fred


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BBC article on Roth novel and Wikipedia article

Steve Summit
In reply to this post by Kathleen McCook
> Fred, you say "Roth is an elderly man googling" and I am wondering if there
> is an age at which people using Wikipedia in the estimation of this list
> become unfit to drive?

Elderly or not, there is the issue of authentication.  On the
internet, famously, nobody know you're a dog -- but nobody knows
if you're Phillip Roth, either.  Does anyone know if OTRS became
involved, here?  If the admin (whoever it was) had referred him
there, instead just accusing him of "not being a credible
source", this might have turned out differently.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Thomas Morton
In reply to this post by Fred Bauder-2
Wow high and mighty much?

I haven't had chance to look into this; but I bet I know what I will
find. Someone being a bit of a jerk to him, which has led to having to
take this approach. Which is about rebutting Wikipedia rather than the
source which we cited.

Rather than whining about him we need to see the problem; it's an
attitude problem HERE.

Tom Morton

On 8 Sep 2012, at 14:53, Fred Bauder <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> Fred, you say" Roth is an elderly man googling" and I am wondering if
>> there
>> is an age at which people using Wikipedia in the estimation of this list
>> become unfit to drive?
>> Roth is an active writer and renowned, Nobel Prize finalist...right this
>> moment..to dismiss him as  "an elderly man googling" underscores why
>> there
>> may be intergenerational unease on this enterprise. Show respect.This
>> comment that "Roth is an elderly man googling is spiteful and not a valid
>> point.
>
> I'm older than he is. Roth is not the the first celebrity to think he
> could dictate Wikipedia content. Michael Moore also felt he could throw
> his weight around. And, no, I don't respect that move. Instead of
> spending decades on line they wrote books and produced documentaries;
> they are Noobies here regardless of their accomplishments elsewhere;
> crying babies squalling and throwing their rattles.
>
> Fred
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Thomas Dalton
In reply to this post by Fred Bauder-2
On 8 September 2012 14:53, Fred Bauder <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I'm older than he is. Roth is not the the first celebrity to think he
> could dictate Wikipedia content. Michael Moore also felt he could throw
> his weight around. And, no, I don't respect that move. Instead of
> spending decades on line they wrote books and produced documentaries;
> they are Noobies here regardless of their accomplishments elsewhere;
> crying babies squalling and throwing their rattles.

The content he was trying to "dictate" was a statement about what his
inspirations had been. I think it is reasonable for him to expect us
to take his word for that. The only problem was that we needed him to
put his word on the matter somewhere we could cite. Once he did that,
we changed the article and cited the new source.

I've only read the BBC article, so I don't know all the details. I
expect there was a failure of communication at some point - either us
not telling him what he needed to do in a clear, consise and
respectful way, or him not being willing to listen and respect our
policies. Without looking into the details, I don't know it was in
this case, but there have been previous cases in both categories.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Charles Matthews
In reply to this post by Thomas Morton
On 8 September 2012 15:43, Thomas Morton <[hidden email]>wrote:

> Wow high and mighty much?
>
> I haven't had chance to look into this; but I bet I know what I will
> find. Someone being a bit of a jerk to him, which has led to having to
> take this approach.


You might be justified in saying this if he was really told he wasn't
"credible". If he was told that he wasn't a "reliable source" in WP's
terms, that is a different kettle of fish.

Charles
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

David Gerard-2
In reply to this post by Thomas Morton
On 8 September 2012 15:43, Thomas Morton <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I haven't had chance to look into this;


That statement invalidates this statement:


> Rather than whining about him we need to see the problem; it's an
> attitude problem HERE.


 -d.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BBC article on Roth novel and Wikipedia article

Fred Bauder-2
In reply to this post by Steve Summit
We need to treat all subjects and potential subjects of articles with
respect and take their complaints seriously. An OTRS referral might have
helped. The material is not oversightable, but would fall within reports
of article errors.

Fred

> ...there is the issue of authentication.  On the
> internet, famously, nobody know you're a dog -- but nobody knows
> if you're Phillip Roth, either.  Does anyone know if OTRS became
> involved, here?  If the admin (whoever it was) had referred him
> there, instead just accusing him of "not being a credible
> source", this might have turned out differently.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Thomas Morton
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
No it doesn't.

I'll give you good odds on me being right.

Because I see the same thing week after week.

Tom Morton

On 8 Sep 2012, at 16:35, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 8 September 2012 15:43, Thomas Morton <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I haven't had chance to look into this;
>
>
> That statement invalidates this statement:
>
>
>> Rather than whining about him we need to see the problem; it's an
>> attitude problem HERE.
>
>
> -d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Thomas Morton
In reply to this post by Charles Matthews
Depends on the explanation I suppose. But "reliable source" is jargon
too, in many cases.

We do have difficulty communicating with non wikipedians. Not in a bad
faith way; it is hard to communicate with others.

I just think we are too quick to blame the subject for "not
understanding us". When it cuts deeply both ways.

Tom Morton

On 8 Sep 2012, at 16:29, Charles Matthews
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 8 September 2012 15:43, Thomas Morton <[hidden email]>wrote:
>
>> Wow high and mighty much?
>>
>> I haven't had chance to look into this; but I bet I know what I will
>> find. Someone being a bit of a jerk to him, which has led to having to
>> take this approach.
>
>
> You might be justified in saying this if he was really told he wasn't
> "credible". If he was told that he wasn't a "reliable source" in WP's
> terms, that is a different kettle of fish.
>
> Charles
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Charles Matthews
In reply to this post by Thomas Morton
On 8 September 2012 16:55, Thomas Morton <[hidden email]>wrote:

> No it doesn't.
>
> I'll give you good odds on me being right.
>
> Because I see the same thing week after week.
>
>
You mean leading author almost synonymous with "rare interview" assumes his
word is good enough for WP? Complaining that people make up stuff about
your inspiration is fair enough: bookchat, as Gore Vidal called it, has a
percentage of drivel. But The Human Stain was published 12 years ago.
Really, nothing on the record?

(I know that isn't what you mean. But Wikipedians in this kind of situation
do have to explain policy to those who don't get it, and act on it, even if
dealing with someone famous.)

Charles
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Fred Bauder-2
In reply to this post by Thomas Morton
We've had a problem with courtesy for a long time; the entire internet
has. We're one of the few organizations that has made a concerted and
determined effort to address it, see

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/weekinreview/29cohen.html

Fred

> No it doesn't.
>
> I'll give you good odds on me being right.
>
> Because I see the same thing week after week.
>
> Tom Morton
>
> On 8 Sep 2012, at 16:35, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On 8 September 2012 15:43, Thomas Morton <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I haven't had chance to look into this;
>>
>>
>> That statement invalidates this statement:
>>
>>
>>> Rather than whining about him we need to see the problem; it's an
>>> attitude problem HERE.
>>
>>
>> -d.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Thomas Morton
In reply to this post by Charles Matthews
It's not a crazy train of thought though; people naturally feel they
are the authority on their own opinions.

We usually don't do brilliantly in explaining why that doesn't work.
Because we start with explaining reliable sources, and often glaze
over the most important bit.

I DO see these sorts of issues all the time. When I log into OTRS
there is sure to be at least one.

I've taken to explaining that Wikipedia only summarises other sources.
So inaccuracy needs to be addressed either with a retraction from the
source, or another source appearing to rebut it.

This is much more palatable than "your word isn't a reliable source".

If for no other reason than the phrasing sounds like your impugning
the reliability of him/her as a person.

Tom Morton

On 8 Sep 2012, at 17:00, Charles Matthews
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 8 September 2012 16:55, Thomas Morton <[hidden email]>wrote:
>
>> No it doesn't.
>>
>> I'll give you good odds on me being right.
>>
>> Because I see the same thing week after week.
>>
>>
> You mean leading author almost synonymous with "rare interview" assumes his
> word is good enough for WP? Complaining that people make up stuff about
> your inspiration is fair enough: bookchat, as Gore Vidal called it, has a
> percentage of drivel. But The Human Stain was published 12 years ago.
> Really, nothing on the record?
>
> (I know that isn't what you mean. But Wikipedians in this kind of situation
> do have to explain policy to those who don't get it, and act on it, even if
> dealing with someone famous.)
>
> Charles
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Charles Matthews
On 8 September 2012 17:12, Thomas Morton <[hidden email]>wrote:

> It's not a crazy train of thought though; people naturally feel they
> are the authority on their own opinions.
>

Actually, if you look at the timeline at

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Human_Stain#The_book.27s_author_requests_this_article_be_corrected


this is Roth's "official biographer" arguing from authority. The "credible"
thing seems to be fairly much a figment?

Charles
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Fred Bauder-2
In reply to this post by Thomas Morton
This is the comment I made to The New Yorker article:

If you, or anyone else, has a similar problem please contact the
Wikipedia:Volunteer Response Team Directions are on that page in
Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Volunteer_Response_Team We are
sorry this matter was not handled better.

Read more
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/09/an-open-letter-to-wikipedia.html#ixzz25taiCMHm

Now, a factual inquiry, if he had done that would this problem have been
solved? Or would he still ended up trying to bully us?

Fred

> It's not a crazy train of thought though; people naturally feel they
> are the authority on their own opinions.
>
> We usually don't do brilliantly in explaining why that doesn't work.
> Because we start with explaining reliable sources, and often glaze
> over the most important bit.
>
> I DO see these sorts of issues all the time. When I log into OTRS
> there is sure to be at least one.
>
> I've taken to explaining that Wikipedia only summarises other sources.
> So inaccuracy needs to be addressed either with a retraction from the
> source, or another source appearing to rebut it.
>
> This is much more palatable than "your word isn't a reliable source".
>
> If for no other reason than the phrasing sounds like your impugning
> the reliability of him/her as a person.
>
> Tom Morton
>
> On 8 Sep 2012, at 17:00, Charles Matthews
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On 8 September 2012 16:55, Thomas Morton
>> <[hidden email]>wrote:
>>
>>> No it doesn't.
>>>
>>> I'll give you good odds on me being right.
>>>
>>> Because I see the same thing week after week.
>>>
>>>
>> You mean leading author almost synonymous with "rare interview" assumes
>> his
>> word is good enough for WP? Complaining that people make up stuff about
>> your inspiration is fair enough: bookchat, as Gore Vidal called it, has
>> a
>> percentage of drivel. But The Human Stain was published 12 years ago.
>> Really, nothing on the record?
>>
>> (I know that isn't what you mean. But Wikipedians in this kind of
>> situation
>> do have to explain policy to those who don't get it, and act on it,
>> even if
>> dealing with someone famous.)
>>
>> Charles
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Thomas Morton
In reply to this post by Charles Matthews
So you're suggesting he is lying about that?

The words he quotes seem genuine. But I can't identify where they came
from; not OTRS??

Tom Morton

On 8 Sep 2012, at 17:17, Charles Matthews
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 8 September 2012 17:12, Thomas Morton <[hidden email]>wrote:
>
>> It's not a crazy train of thought though; people naturally feel they
>> are the authority on their own opinions.
>>
>
> Actually, if you look at the timeline at
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Human_Stain#The_book.27s_author_requests_this_article_be_corrected
>
>
> this is Roth's "official biographer" arguing from authority. The "credible"
> thing seems to be fairly much a figment?
>
> Charles
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Fred Bauder-2
> So you're suggesting he is lying about that?
>
> The words he quotes seem genuine. But I can't identify where they came
> from; not OTRS??
>
> Tom

Sounds like OTRS, perhaps the ticket is in his spokesman's name.

Fred


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Ken Arromdee
In reply to this post by Charles Matthews
On Sat, 8 Sep 2012, Charles Matthews wrote:
> You might be justified in saying this if he was really told he wasn't
> "credible". If he was told that he wasn't a "reliable source" in WP's
> terms, that is a different kettle of fish.

How's he supposed to know the difference?

Besides, once he is verified to be himself, he is a reliable source.  The
issue was that he was a primary source and the secondary sources had
preference.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Charles Matthews
On 10 September 2012 17:04, Ken Arromdee <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sat, 8 Sep 2012, Charles Matthews wrote:
>
>> You might be justified in saying this if he was really told he wasn't
>> "credible". If he was told that he wasn't a "reliable source" in WP's
>> terms, that is a different kettle of fish.
>>
>
> How's he supposed to know the difference?
>

Oh, I don't know, they keep saying he should get a Nobel Prize as a
novelist, so perhaps his command of the English language is above average.
There is a nuance.

>
> Besides, once he is verified to be himself, he is a reliable source.  The
> issue was that he was a primary source and the secondary sources had
> preference.
>
>
The issue appears to be something different. Roth's biographer wanted the
existing secondary sources zapped from the article as simply worthless, and
we couldn't accept that. Roth's unpublished view as funnelled through his
biographer might have had to have waited until the biography was published,
in which case we would have cited it without trouble. Via what appears to
be an OTRS mail Roth was given what appears to be the wrong advice, phrased
in terms of secondary sources. As
WP:ABOUTSELF<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ABOUTSELF> tells
us, Roth simply had to get his view published; which he did. The caveat in
the article by 20 August was actually enough to cast great doubt on the
other story about his inspiration, at least for any attentive reader.

It is traditional to hang all sorts of other considerations on these
incidents, but from the point of view of getting the case study straight,
it isn't that helpful.

Charles
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Roth is an elderly man googling

Ken Arromdee
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Charles Matthews wrote:

>> Besides, once he is verified to be himself, he is a reliable source.  The
>> issue was that he was a primary source and the secondary sources had
>> preference.
> The issue appears to be something different. Roth's biographer wanted the
> existing secondary sources zapped from the article as simply worthless, and
> we couldn't accept that. Roth's unpublished view as funnelled through his
> biographer might have had to have waited until the biography was published,
> in which case we would have cited it without trouble. Via what appears to
> be an OTRS mail Roth was given what appears to be the wrong advice, phrased
> in terms of secondary sources.

Let me get this straight:

He was given the wrong advice about secondary sources...  and it's his fault?

This is definitely Wikipedia's problem.  Wikipedia's policy *as practiced*
failed him, and failed us.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
12