[Taxacom] Wikispecies has gone to the dogs, best to disregard it now

Mike Sadka mike.sadka at nhm.ac.uk
Thu Apr 30 19:16:25 CDT 2015


> Sound familiar??

Indeed it does - lol!

And were those big database projects you "devalue and point fingers at" not created by people "trying to create a useful resource"?

I'm not trying to be obtuse, and you may well have a point about Wikispecies (humans are falible - not a big surprise), but I fail to see the difference between your finger pointing and anyone else's - sorry!

Cheerio, and no offence intended, Mike

 


________________________________________
From: Stephen Thorpe [stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz]
Sent: 30 April 2015 22:00
To: JF Mate; Scott Thomson; Mike Sadka
Cc: Taxacom
Subject: RE: [Taxacom] Wikispecies has gone to the dogs,        best to disregard it now

Mike,

It is indeed the same Wikispecies that had great potential to be a major biodiversity resource. Unfortunately, it has been spoiled by those who like to devalue and point fingers at others who are are trying to create a useful resource. Sound familiar??

Stephen

--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 30/4/15, Mike Sadka <mike.sadka at nhm.ac.uk> wrote:

 Subject: RE: [Taxacom] Wikispecies has gone to the dogs,       best to disregard it now
 To: "'Stephen Thorpe'" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>, "JF Mate" <aphodiinaemate at gmail.com>, "Scott Thomson" <scott.thomson321 at gmail.com>
 Cc: "Taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
 Received: Thursday, 30 April, 2015, 9:50 PM

 Hi Stephen

 Is this the same wikispecies
 you used to tell us all was the future of biodiversity IT
 ?

 And by the way - you
 accuse others of ad hominem attacks, but your comments have
 been the most barbed in this thread.

 Cheerio, Mike

 -----Original Message-----
 From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu]
 On Behalf Of Stephen Thorpe
 Sent: 30 April
 2015 00:20
 To: JF Mate; Scott Thomson
 Cc: Taxacom
 Subject: Re:
 [Taxacom] Wikispecies has gone to the dogs, best to
 disregard it now

 I was
 waiting for your response, Scott, since you are one of the
 major players in the dispute, i.e. your hands are dirty! You
 can turn it into an ad hominem argument against me if you
 wish, but it doesn't change the facts of what I said,
 namely that Wikispecies is no longer a reliable site, and
 should be diregarded. Now you can go back to your
 Wikispecies agenda of trying to rewrite the history of
 reptile taxonomy.

 Stephen

 --------------------------------------------
 On Thu, 30/4/15, Scott Thomson <scott.thomson321 at gmail.com>
 wrote:

  Subject: Re:
 [Taxacom] Wikispecies has gone to the dogs,    best to
 disregard it now
  To: "JF Mate"
 <aphodiinaemate at gmail.com>
  Cc: "Taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
  Received: Thursday, 30 April, 2015, 11:14
 AM

  I did not relise this
 had
  been crossposted to Taxacom as well as
 ICZN  List.. My response over there was:


  --------------------------------
  Stephen that is low, Wikimedia cannot defend
 themselves here and you have  cherry picked  one item that
 agrees with your statement. I am not going  to  argue with
 you here, since it is not the  ICZN lists business, however
 if  you are  going to say you have been blocked maybe you
 should say why  you  have been permanently banned from
 the  English Wikipedia and Wikispecies and  are on
 blocks for Meta-Wiki and Wiki Commons. Thats 4 sites, in
 my
  8 years
  as an editor in
 Wikimedia although I
  am sure there are
 others, and worse, I
  personally have not
 seen anyone else get a ban  like that so quickly. Your
 hatred of  wikimedia is very evident in what you have said
 in recent  times,  it extends clearly from the treatment
 you received. Hence anything you say  anywhere on
 Wikispecies or any other Wikimedia  Project needs to be
 taken  with a grain of  salt and is clearly dipped in
 acid. I have told you  before  you need to let this go for
 a while,  let it calm down. I even said I would  propose
 the removal of the bans, but you have  to stop and let it
 go and fix  the damage  first.

  Now please, let it
  go this is
 not the forum for it.

 -------------------------------------

  In response to Jason, it is a

 playground fight. I was not involved in it,  made sure I
 stayed out of it, but I have had to  watch it. Not
 pretty.

  Cheers, Scott

  On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 7:19
 PM, JF Mate <aphodiinaemate at gmail.com>
  wrote:

  >
 Maybe you
  should copy and paste the actual
 example/s as succintly  as  > possible. Otherwise it
 just looks  like a playground fight.

 >
  > Jason
  > On
 30/04/2015
  8:03 AM, "Stephen
 Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz> 
 > wrote:
  >
  > >
 There has been a "military

 takeover" of Wikispecies, by people who know  >
 > not what they are doing (see, for  example, this
 article  > > http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Austrophthiracarus_longisetosus
  in
  > > which homonymy
 has been
  confused with synonymy!) I have
 been excluded and  > > blocked from editing the site
 in  future. The following comment, posted by  > >
 another editor who is alarmed by what  is happening (please
 excuse his  > >
  English) is
 illustrative of the current situation, so I copy  it
 below  > from  > >  the Wikispecies Village
 Pump:
  > >
  > >
 Reducing time for working at
  Wikispecies
  > >
  >
  > At Wikispecies about 2 million taxon
 pages are missing.
  Instead of really
  > > contributing to

 Wikispecies, that is adding new pages, there is a playing
 > > around with an AWB and modifying or  deleting
 things that do no harm, like  >  > the double square
 brackets of taxon names on hundreds  of thousand pages.
  > > And proudly is
  told
 of "contributions". That are no

 contributions. There
  > is
  > > nothing professional in it.
  Wikispecies is the only Wiki that expects to
 > > have users from the scientific  community.
 Observing what is done at  >  > present, will not
 attract such users. It will lead to a  number of closed
 > > Wikis for groups  of organisms, as first ones are
 already existing, so  > that  > > such
 unprofessional actions are not possible.

 > > I'll considerably reduce my

 working time here under the present
  >
  > circumstances. Kempf EK (talk) 16:18, 28
 April 2015
  (UTC)
  >
 >

 _______________________________________________
  > > Taxacom Mailing List
  > > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
  > > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
  > > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992
 may  be searched at:
  > > http://taxacom.markmail.org
  > >
  > >
 Celebrating
  28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
  > >
  >

 _______________________________________________
  > Taxacom Mailing List

 >
  Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
  > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
  > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
 searched at:
  > http://taxacom.markmail.org
  >
  > Celebrating 28
 years
  of Taxacom in 2015.

 >




  --
  Scott Thomson
  Museu de Zoologia
  da
 Universidade de São Paulo
  Divisão de
  Vertebrados (Herpetologia)

 Avenida Nazaré,
  481, Ipiranga
  04263-000, São Paulo, SP,

 Brasil
  http://www.carettochelys.com
  ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1279-2722
  Skype: Faendalimas
  Reptile
  Names (my blog) http://reptilenames.wordpress.com/
  Mobile Phone: +55 11 996 48 5668
  Mobile in Australia +61 402 357 553 (0402
 357
  553)

 _______________________________________________
  Taxacom Mailing List
  Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
  http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
  The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
 searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org

  Celebrating 28 years of
  Taxacom in 2015.

 _______________________________________________
 Taxacom Mailing List
 Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
 searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org

 Celebrating 28 years of
 Taxacom in 2015.




More information about the Taxacom mailing list