Up until a couple of weeks ago I was blissfully unaware of Wikipedia's nasty side. I was just an occasional editor, contributing mostly to various articles in which I had technical expertise.

Then one day an IP flagged one of the articles I had created and edited (which had existed undisturbed for many months) as spam (CSD#G11), and soon after all hell broke loose. The former article covered a new free software project called TurnKey Linux that I had helped start and contributed to (mostly as a webmaster / technical support / writing documentation). I tried my best to follow the rules and be mindful of my potential COI by being upfront about it from the start but bad faith was assumed regardless and was rammed against me ferociously.

I was really very naive when all of this started and had no idea what I was up against, or the kind of corrosive poisonous personalities I would soon be dealing with such as the world famous Guy Chapman AKA JzG.

Since then I've done my research and I know my experience isn't unique, and that people have suffered through much much worse.

In Wikipedia's defense I've also encountered some terrific, highly principled people who must have spent hours trying to correct the abuse of process that had happened, but so far to no avail as the deletionists have called in the reserves.

In short, if there is anyone here who would care to take a look at this and maybe lend a hand that would be great:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Del...2009_February_9

UPDATE: they just closed the review. Can they do that after just two days?

This has gone way past the point where there is any rational motivation for me to continue pursuing this but all disingenuous politicking, arm twisting and personal attacks have irked me to the point that I am fighting on principle, even while realizing perfectly well that I would be much better off just letting this be. I'm not likely to win, and even if I did, it would be a pyrrhic victory (as Roofwl so .

I've tried doing some soul searching to figure out why it is so hard for me to just turn my back on the whole sorry affair and I think my problem is I am still mourning the tragic gap between what I imagined Wikipedia to be - a friendly, respectful oasis of free knowledge that actually abides by their own ideal rules and policies - and what it is - a vicious RPG where a nasty power-mad aristocracy that contributes little actual content rules of over editor plebs who do all the work with an iron fist and pay only lip service to their own rules and regulations. Pity the editor who gets caught up in one of their witch-hunts - they will gang up and maraud you like a pack of rabid dogs.

The article was unsourced other than to another wiki and the Ubuntu mailing list, and consisted just of a list of features and some guff about how easy it is to use. There is admin abuse on Wikipedia, but deleting this page wasn't it. If you want someone to host this, I'm sure Greg would be happy to take it.

I'm afraid "lending a hand" would mainly entail talking about your case here, Liraz, rather than appearing in person, as it were, on Wikipedia itself. That would be pointless.

They have the power, L.

Now you're talking. Try to think of those "people" as something slightly less than human. Hell, think of them with no clothes on in the shitter, "laying a cable". That's the way to do it. The beginning of wisdom, as they say.

Sorry Liraz, they might have a point here--you need to get more
publicity and notice, and generate some third-party references,
before making a WP article.

A Google search showed very little other than blog posts and your own
announcements. Need to start press-releasing the world. Just posting little
announcements to blogs and forums isn't enough. Make your press release
LOOK like a corporate PR item, and people will take it seriously.

Talk big. Include a list of developers working on it plus interested parties,
and most of all, talk about intended applications (embedded, kiosks, whatever).

Nothing seems to get attention nowadays like an OS for a mobile handheld
gadget. You might bring up Turnkey as a specialized ultra-lightweight OS for mobiles.
Have you considered getting a small tablet PC or thin client, and putting Turnkey
on it as a demonstration project? Linuxdevices.com has an endless list of
possible host devices. Like this one and this one.

Since you're making up variations for different jobs, put out a press release
for EACH VARIATION. It costs almost nothing to put out press releases today,
with email.

Send an announcement to Distrowatch. How about linux.com?
Send it to Computerworld, CNET, Gizmodo, Engadget, and all mainstream news outlets.
I've noticed that even in the open-source world, most of the
"journalists" are just as dumb, lazy and flashy-gadget distracted as
in any other field. Sad but true. So, feed them a flashy gadget.

I'd suggest you get a friend who has a Slashdot account to post it to Slashdot.
It's difficult to get on their front page with news of a new distro, but NOT impossible.
There's no better publicity for open-source projects than a mention on Slashdot.

There are thousands of Linux distros these days, with more almost every day.
(Even something called Bloody Stupid Linux.....)
You need to make Turnkey stand out.

Welcome to the Review, Liraz.

I've gone ahead and created http://encyc.org/wiki/TurnKey_Linux, using content from Wikipedia. Please feel free to add to or change it.

Thanks for the warm welcome everyone.

I was a bit frustrated and angry when I first found Wikipedia Review and posted my message. Now that I have calmed down I am more philosophical about this. As EricBarbour pointed out very eloquently once the project gets a little more publicity the whole notability issue kind of resolves itself, and there are many ways to get the project noticed.

Defending an edge case is not only difficult, it is also probably a waste of time. Much better to spend that time developing exciting new features, improving the website and spreading the word about the project in more friendly venues than Wikipedia.

Really I didn't mind the deletion of the article as much as I was bothered by how it was done. Not the normal AFD / PROD process with the implied opportunity to improve the article and build consensus but a speedy deletion under CSD#G11 that was triggered by an anonymous IP vandal. I also share the blame. As a friendly administrator pointed out on my talk page, I made several mistakes in how I handled the whole issue and once I had attracted enough undesirable attention it was basically futile trying to argue for a case that wasn't clear and cut.

In retrospect I payed for the price for being a bit of a hot-head. I felt singled out and the personal attacks got under my skin. That led me to be much more aggressive about defending my case than could be justified by any possible benefit in winning.

Anyhow, I think I'll take a break from all this and cool down for a while and then see if I can work within the system with the help of some of the friendlier people on Wikipedia, preferably after the project gets more proof of notability.

Cheers!