Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Skepticism and coordinated editing/Proposed decision: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Comments by Gronk Oz: More clarity on what is meant by "skepticism topics" would help |
|||
Line 32:
::::It isn't the training per se, but the membership of a non-profit group run by Sgerbic. If I'm the member of a nonprofit, I'd be regarding as having a COI in regard to the actions of that group and the leadership/membership of the organisation. (Which is, clearly, why I don't write about nonprofits which I'm part of). - [[User:Bilby|Bilby]] ([[User talk:Bilby|talk]]) 00:28, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
== Comments by
Please excuse me for raising this same point again, but I am concerned about difficulties in interpreting and implementing the decision as it is currently written, because terms like "skepticism trade publications" and "skepticism topics, broadly construed" are so ambiguous. If I look at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism|WikiProject Skepticism]], the topics they list as being in the scope of skepticism include all of valid science, pseudoscience, valid philosophy, pseudophilosophy, cults, and pseudoarchaeology. I cannot read the minds of the drafters, but I would be surprised if they intended the remedies to extend as broadly as that. So it leaves the question of just what is intended to be included in the scope of the remedies - more clarity would really be appreciated.--[[User:Gronk Oz|Gronk Oz]] ([[User talk:Gronk Oz|talk]]) 00:36, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
== Comments by {username} ==
| |||