Misplaced Pages

User talk:Jimbo Wales: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:57, 8 April 2009 view sourceJimbo Wales (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Founder14,543 edits It's a serious question, so let's stop this fussing: - declining participation in this debate - not interested, sorry← Previous edit Revision as of 17:57, 8 April 2009 view source 189.105.10.198 (talk) Undid revision 282595439 by David Shankbone (talk) "Others" was you. Theres new info in the post now. let Wales handNext edit →
Line 45: Line 45:


I check it daily and I'm on it more or less all the time. Response times can vary widely. At the moment, I have it more or less under control with only 94 pending items, the oldest being December 21st.--] (]) 13:40, 8 April 2009 (UTC) I check it daily and I'm on it more or less all the time. Response times can vary widely. At the moment, I have it more or less under control with only 94 pending items, the oldest being December 21st.--] (]) 13:40, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

== An open letter to Jimmy Wales ==

'''Note:''' the following letter has been deleted, restored, and then deleted again. Let me clarify something. Jimmy's participation in a public debate is not necessary. But I do want to assert a right to place this open letter on his user talk page--he is, after all, the project's leading light. Besides, it is unseemly to delete an earnest, legitimate, and justified complaint. Openness to this sort of public criticism seems to be a requirement of any leader of such an open project devoted to freedom of speech and transparency. I have some very legitimate complaints about how Jimmy has treated me and my role in Misplaced Pages, and I wish to be heard--even if no response is offered. --] (]) 17:40, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Jimmy, I don't know a better place than this for an open letter to
you. I recently read the Hot Press interview with you. The lies and
distortions it contains are, for me, the last straw, especially after
came to
light, in which you described yourself as "co-founder" in 2002.

I've reached out to you on a couple of occasions to coordinate our
"versions"--well, my version and your fanciful
inventions--about how Misplaced Pages got started. Last year I read about
a speech in which you represented me as being more or less opposed to
Misplaced Pages from the start--despite it being my own baby, really--and I
wrote to you saying that if you keep this up, I will speak out. Well,
I'm finally speaking out.

In Misplaced Pages's first three years, it was clear to everyone working on
it that not only had I named the project, I came up with and promoted
the idea of making a wiki encyclopedia, wrote the first policy pages
and many more policy pages in the following year, led the project, and
enforced many rules that are now taken for granted. I came up with a
lot of stuff that is regarded as standard operating procedure. For
instance, I argued that talk should go on talk pages and got people
into that habit. Similarly, after meta-discussion started taking up so
much of Misplaced Pages's time and energy, I shepherded talk about the
project to meta.wikipedia.org--and after that, to Misplaced Pages-L and
WikiEN-L. I insisted that we were working on an encyclopedia, not on
the many other things one can use a wiki for. I came up with the name
"Wikipedian" and other Misplaced Pages jargon. I had devised a neutrality
policy for Nupedia, and I elaborated it in a form that stood for
several years on Misplaced Pages. I did a lot of explaining and evangelizing
for Misplaced Pages--what it is about, why we are here, and so forth--for
example, in ] and a couple of
well-known posts on kuro5hin.org
and
I also
recall introducing many specific policy details, the evidence for which is in
archives (such as on archive.org) and no doubt in the memories of some
of the more active early Wikipedians.

These are only some examples of ways in which I led the project in its
first 14 months; after I left, there was a lot of soul-searching in
the project about what would happen now that it was "leaderless" (see
the quotations linked from ).
When I was involved in the project, I was regarded as its
chief organizer. As you can still see in the archives, I called
''myself'' "Chief Instigator" and "Chief Organizer" and the like (not
editor).

I also want to correct you on something that tends to harm me: your
repeated insinuations that I was "fired." In the ''Hot Press''
interview, you said I left Misplaced Pages because you "didn't want to pay
him any more." You know--and so does everyone else who worked at
Bomis, Inc., around a dozen people--that at the end of 2001, you had
to go back to Bomis' original 4-5 employees, because of the tech
market bust, when Bomis suddenly lost a million-dollar ad deal. Tim
Shell told me I was the last person to be laid off. He told me--the
day I arrived back from my honeymoon, as I recall--that I should
probably start looking for new work, because of the market. I was made
to believe, and always did until a few years ago when you started
implying otherwise, that I had been laid off just like all the other
Bomis employees.

In those first three years, Misplaced Pages did three press releases, in
which we are both given credit as founders of the project. I in January 2002; you read and approved it
before posting it on the wires. Moreover, you must have read the many
early news articles that called us both founders. You could have
complained then--when you were CEO of the company that paid my
paycheck. But you didn't. In fact, you called yourself "co-founder"
from time to time. Evidence of this has surfaced in the form of
in which you begin, "Hello, let me introduce myself. I'm Jimmy
Wales, co-founder of Nupedia and Misplaced Pages, the open content
encyclopedias." While your company supplied the funding and you
supplied some guidance, I supplied the main leadership of the early
project. This is why Misplaced Pages's second press release also called me
"founder," in 2003--just after I broke permanently with you and the
Misplaced Pages community--and the Wikimedia Foundation's first press
release described me the same way, in early 2004.

I had nothing to do with the second and third press releases, and, as
Bomis CEO and Wikimedia Chair, you approved all three. But now read
what you told Hot Press recently. The interviewer asked: "Sanger said
that proof of his being co-founder is on the initial press releases.
Are you saying that he basically just put himself down as co-founder
on these press releases?" You answered "Yes." How could I "put myself
down as co-founder" in 2003 and 2004, when I wasn't even part of the
organization? This is an attempt to buff your reputation while
making me look like a liar--but your simple "Yes" answer can be
refuted with
you were a contact on all three press releases.

Beginning in 2004, you began leaving me out of the story of
Misplaced Pages's origin. You began implying, to reporters, that you had
done a lot of the sort of work that, ''in fact,'' you hired me to do. You have even
implied that I was opposed to various ideas that were crucial to
Misplaced Pages's popular success--when those were, for all intents and purposes, my own ideas. A good example is Daniel Pink's
for
''Wired Magazine''--in which you implied that I had little or nothing to do with Misplaced Pages.

You still do this. You told the ''Hot Press'' interviewer, "Larry was
never comfortable with the open-editing model of Misplaced Pages and he very
early on wanted to start locking things down and giving certain people
special authority--you know, recruit experts to supervise certain
areas of the encyclopaedia and things like that." This is a lie. I was
perfectly comfortable with the "open-editing model of Misplaced Pages."
After all, that was ''my idea.'' I did not want to "start locking things down"----or to
"recruit experts to supervise certain areas of
the encyclopaedia." I challenge anyone to find any evidence in the
archive that I did any such thing. For my early attitude toward expert
involvement, see
written a year after the project started. Besides, your claim doesn't
make sense. Even after a year, I was hoping that a revitalized Nupedia
would work in tandem with Misplaced Pages as its vetting service. Though
you increasingly disliked Nupedia as Misplaced Pages's star rose, it was
always my
assumption that you felt the same way about at least the ''potential''
of the two projects working together.

It was one thing, in 2004, to leave me out of the story of Misplaced Pages. It was another to assert in 2005, (1) for that contrary to , or (2) that I am not co-founder of the project. But in both cases, people scanning the Misplaced Pages-L mailing list archives found old mails in which you contradicted yourself. has you giving me credit--as, of course, I always ''had'' been given credit--for the idea of Misplaced Pages, and surfaced just a few days ago in which ''you called yourself'' "co-founder" of Misplaced Pages.

I find your behavior since 2004 transparently self-serving, considering that this rewriting of history began in 2004, just as Wikia.com was getting started, and you started promoting your reputation as the brains behind Misplaced Pages. There is a long "paper trail" establishing virtually all of my claims about Misplaced Pages, and which refute your various attempts to rewrite history.

I have not publicly confronted you about this before, to this extent.
Public controversies are emotionally wrenching and time-consuming. I
know I might be (verbally) attacked more viciously than ever by your fans and Misplaced Pages's. (To them, I just point out that Misplaced Pages is bigger than Jimmy Wales.) I have mainly limited myself to answering reporters' questions--keeping my more harshly-worded statements off the record--and to Occasionally I couldn't help objecting to some particularly outrageous claim, but I never went all out.

I thought that the evidence against your claims about me would shame
you into changing your behavior. But, five years since you started
misrepresenting my role in the founding of Misplaced Pages, you're still at
it.

I have been content to watch you reap the rewards of the project I
started for you, largely without comment. You (with Tim Shell and
Michael Davis, the Bomis partners) did, after all, sponsor the
project. After leaving Misplaced Pages, I went back to academia and, after
that, worked for a succession of nonprofit projects--these days,
and now also
I have not tried to cash in
on my own reputation. I have been approached by a number of venture
capitalists, entrepreneurs, and publishers and have always told them
that I have my own plans. If I ''had'' wanted to cash in myself, I
wouldn't have moved away from Silicon Valley back to Ohio, as I did,
in order to lower my costs in supporting the non-profit projects which
I've made my life's work.

The ''Hot Press'' interview is the straw that broke this camel's back.
I resent being the victim of another person's self-serving lies.
Besides, I don't want to set a poor example in my failure to defend
myself.

Please don't say I'm making mountains out of molehills. When you go
out of your way to edit Misplaced Pages articles to
or
I don't call that correcting "very simple errors," as you told ''Hot Press''. What angers me is not any one error, but the accumulated weight of your lies about me--I've mentioned only a few of them here.

Finally, you might protest that you have said, several times, that I
am not credited enough. For example, you told ''Hot Press'':

:I feel that Larry's work is often under-appreciated. He really did a lot in the first year to think through editorial policy. ... I would actually love to have it on the record that I said: I think Larry's work should be more appreciated. He's a really brilliant guy.

This sounds like a fine sentiment. But how could it be sincere? What
better way to ensure that I am "under-appreciated" than to contradict
your own first three press releases and tell the ''Boston Globe,'' just two years later, that it's "preposterous" that I am called co-founder?

I have two further requests, not of you, but of those who deal with
you: the Wikimedia Foundation and reporters.

First, I ask the Board of the Wikimedia Foundation to reiterate the
Foundation's original position (as expressed in its
)
that we are both, in fact, founders of Misplaced Pages. (I note that the author of the recent history of Misplaced Pages, Andrew "fuzheado" Lih, was
and contacts for this press release.) If the Foundation is unwilling, I request an
explanation why its corporate view has changed. Is it simply because Jimmy Wales has made his wishes known and you enforce them?

Second, I request any reporter who interviews you about the early
history of Misplaced Pages and Nupedia to interview me as well, so I can correct
anything misleading. They should know that there are many details in my 2005 and my story has never varied. I would also appreciate it if a reporter were to inquire about my request, above, to the Board of the Wikimedia Foundation.

--] (]) 15:38, 8 April 2009 (UTC) (sanger@citizendium.org)

Revision as of 17:57, 8 April 2009

Peace dove with olive branch in its beakPlease stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
Start a new talk topic.

This is Jimbo Wales's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.
Archives: Index, Index, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252Auto-archiving period: 2 days 
Archiving icon
Archives
Index -index-
  1. September – December 2005
  2. January 2006
  3. January – February 2006
  4. February 2006
  5. February 2006, cont.
  6. March 2006
  7. April 2006 - late May 2006
  8. May 24 - July 2006
  9. July 2006 - August 2006
  10. August 2006
  11. Most of September 2006
  12. Late September 2006 - Early November 2006
  13. Most of November 2006
  14. Late November 2006 - December 8, 2006
  15. December 9, 2006 - Mid January 2007
  16. From December 22, 2006 blanking
  17. Mid January 2007 - Mid February 2007
  18. Mid February 2007- Feb 25, 2007
  19. From March 2, 2007 blanking
  20. March 2-5, 2007
  21. March 5-11, 2007
  22. March 11 - April 3, 2007
  23. April 2 - May 2, 2007
  24. May 3 - June 7, 2007
  25. June 9 - July 4, 2007
  26. July 13 - August 17, 2007
  27. August 17 - September 11, 2007
  28. September 14 - October 7, 2007
  29. October 28 - December 1, 2007
  30. December 2 - December 16, 2007
  31. December 15 - January 4, 2008
  32. January 4 - January 30, 2008
  33. January 30 - February 28, 2008
  34. February 28 - March 11, 2008
  35. March 9 - April 18, 2008
  36. April 18 - May 30, 2008
  37. May 30 - July 27, 2008
  38. July 26 - October 4, 2008
  39. October 4 - November 12, 2008
  40. November 10 - December 10, 2008
  41. December 5 - December 25, 2008
  42. December 25 - January 16, 2009
  43. January 15 - January 27, 2009
  44. January 26 - February 10, 2009
  45. February 8 - March 18, 2009
  46. March 18 - May 6, 2009
  47. May 5 - June 9, 2009
  48. June 10 - July 11, 2009
  49. July 12 - August 29, 2009


This page has archives. Sections older than 2 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

No sock puppetry

Jimmy Wales, please turn down any suspected sockpuppetry on your account. It might just be vandalism. Ms dos mode (talk) 00:09, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

It's just an April fools' joke posted by someone. Nothing to worry about. Chamal 02:05, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

No April Fools' joke

No, it isn't an April Fools' joke. -->Why would she wink at my section of discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ms dos mode (talkcontribs) 00:35, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

You did see all the[REDACTED] jokes on april fools day. so just give it a rest as we all need to have some fun on[REDACTED] after all does it realy mater if we have fun mattman (talk) 07:19, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Quick hello and thanks

Given that I've been here some three and a half years, I figure it's time to at least say hello to the leader behind such an amazing project! I usually don't like to become such a significant part of anything, but what a beauty it is that anyone can do as little or as much as they want. For a period of time, I left the project, having convinced myself that my academic and artistic pursuits required more of my time. As if slapped in the face by fate, I realized I needed this outlet, and so here I am to stay. I know you probably get stories like this very often, but I have to thank and congratulate you for the site. May each year be as successful as the last! --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:10, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

TERRIBLE THING ABOUT THE[REDACTED] LOGO

I recently found out that the Chinese character on the logo of wiki was wrong. As a native Chinese, I know perfectly well that that character should be written as 祖. An additional dot on the globe could be seen. Please correct it right away. Sammy312 (talk) 02:52, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

personally i believe that on the english wikipdia nobody will notice mattman (talk) 07:20, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

There are several mistakes on the logo, we know all about them and hopefully they will be fixed sooner or later. It's easier said than done, though, unfortunately. --Tango (talk) 18:35, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
In particular, see meta:Talk:Misplaced Pages/Logo#The proposed Chinese character in particular and that page in general for recent discussion. - BanyanTree 03:47, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Jimmy

How often do you check your Wikia email & how long does it take to reply normally?

Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dottydotdot (talkcontribs) 18:34, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I check it daily and I'm on it more or less all the time. Response times can vary widely. At the moment, I have it more or less under control with only 94 pending items, the oldest being December 21st.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 13:40, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

An open letter to Jimmy Wales

Note: the following letter has been deleted, restored, and then deleted again. Let me clarify something. Jimmy's participation in a public debate is not necessary. But I do want to assert a right to place this open letter on his user talk page--he is, after all, the project's leading light. Besides, it is unseemly to delete an earnest, legitimate, and justified complaint. Openness to this sort of public criticism seems to be a requirement of any leader of such an open project devoted to freedom of speech and transparency. I have some very legitimate complaints about how Jimmy has treated me and my role in Misplaced Pages, and I wish to be heard--even if no response is offered. --Larry Sanger (talk) 17:40, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Jimmy, I don't know a better place than this for an open letter to you. I recently read the Hot Press interview with you. The lies and distortions it contains are, for me, the last straw, especially after this came to light, in which you described yourself as "co-founder" in 2002.

I've reached out to you on a couple of occasions to coordinate our "versions"--well, my version and your fanciful inventions--about how Misplaced Pages got started. Last year I read about a speech in which you represented me as being more or less opposed to Misplaced Pages from the start--despite it being my own baby, really--and I wrote to you saying that if you keep this up, I will speak out. Well, I'm finally speaking out.

In Misplaced Pages's first three years, it was clear to everyone working on it that not only had I named the project, I came up with and promoted the idea of making a wiki encyclopedia, wrote the first policy pages and many more policy pages in the following year, led the project, and enforced many rules that are now taken for granted. I came up with a lot of stuff that is regarded as standard operating procedure. For instance, I argued that talk should go on talk pages and got people into that habit. Similarly, after meta-discussion started taking up so much of Misplaced Pages's time and energy, I shepherded talk about the project to meta.wikipedia.org--and after that, to Misplaced Pages-L and WikiEN-L. I insisted that we were working on an encyclopedia, not on the many other things one can use a wiki for. I came up with the name "Wikipedian" and other Misplaced Pages jargon. I had devised a neutrality policy for Nupedia, and I elaborated it in a form that stood for several years on Misplaced Pages. I did a lot of explaining and evangelizing for Misplaced Pages--what it is about, why we are here, and so forth--for example, in Misplaced Pages:Our Replies to Our Critics and a couple of well-known posts on kuro5hin.org like this one and this. I also recall introducing many specific policy details, the evidence for which is in archives (such as on archive.org) and no doubt in the memories of some of the more active early Wikipedians.

These are only some examples of ways in which I led the project in its first 14 months; after I left, there was a lot of soul-searching in the project about what would happen now that it was "leaderless" (see the quotations linked from this page). When I was involved in the project, I was regarded as its chief organizer. As you can still see in the archives, I called myself "Chief Instigator" and "Chief Organizer" and the like (not editor).

I also want to correct you on something that tends to harm me: your repeated insinuations that I was "fired." In the Hot Press interview, you said I left Misplaced Pages because you "didn't want to pay him any more." You know--and so does everyone else who worked at Bomis, Inc., around a dozen people--that at the end of 2001, you had to go back to Bomis' original 4-5 employees, because of the tech market bust, when Bomis suddenly lost a million-dollar ad deal. Tim Shell told me I was the last person to be laid off. He told me--the day I arrived back from my honeymoon, as I recall--that I should probably start looking for new work, because of the market. I was made to believe, and always did until a few years ago when you started implying otherwise, that I had been laid off just like all the other Bomis employees.

In those first three years, Misplaced Pages did three press releases, in which we are both given credit as founders of the project. I drafted the first press release in January 2002; you read and approved it before posting it on the wires. Moreover, you must have read the many early news articles that called us both founders. You could have complained then--when you were CEO of the company that paid my paycheck. But you didn't. In fact, you called yourself "co-founder" from time to time. Evidence of this has surfaced in the form of this post to xodp in which you begin, "Hello, let me introduce myself. I'm Jimmy Wales, co-founder of Nupedia and Misplaced Pages, the open content encyclopedias." While your company supplied the funding and you supplied some guidance, I supplied the main leadership of the early project. This is why Misplaced Pages's second press release also called me "founder," in 2003--just after I broke permanently with you and the Misplaced Pages community--and the Wikimedia Foundation's first press release described me the same way, in early 2004.

I had nothing to do with the second and third press releases, and, as Bomis CEO and Wikimedia Chair, you approved all three. But now read what you told Hot Press recently. The interviewer asked: "Sanger said that proof of his being co-founder is on the initial press releases. Are you saying that he basically just put himself down as co-founder on these press releases?" You answered "Yes." How could I "put myself down as co-founder" in 2003 and 2004, when I wasn't even part of the organization? This is an attempt to buff your reputation while making me look like a liar--but your simple "Yes" answer can be refuted with a few URLs; you were a contact on all three press releases.

Beginning in 2004, you began leaving me out of the story of Misplaced Pages's origin. You began implying, to reporters, that you had done a lot of the sort of work that, in fact, you hired me to do. You have even implied that I was opposed to various ideas that were crucial to Misplaced Pages's popular success--when those were, for all intents and purposes, my own ideas. A good example is Daniel Pink's article for Wired Magazine--in which you implied that I had little or nothing to do with Misplaced Pages.

You still do this. You told the Hot Press interviewer, "Larry was never comfortable with the open-editing model of Misplaced Pages and he very early on wanted to start locking things down and giving certain people special authority--you know, recruit experts to supervise certain areas of the encyclopaedia and things like that." This is a lie. I was perfectly comfortable with the "open-editing model of Misplaced Pages." After all, that was my idea. I did not want to "start locking things down"----or to "recruit experts to supervise certain areas of the encyclopaedia." I challenge anyone to find any evidence in the archive that I did any such thing. For my early attitude toward expert involvement, see this column, written a year after the project started. Besides, your claim doesn't make sense. Even after a year, I was hoping that a revitalized Nupedia would work in tandem with Misplaced Pages as its vetting service. Though you increasingly disliked Nupedia as Misplaced Pages's star rose, it was always my assumption that you felt the same way about at least the potential of the two projects working together.

It was one thing, in 2004, to leave me out of the story of Misplaced Pages. It was another to assert in 2005, (1) for the very first time, that somebody else had the idea for the project, contrary to what had been on the books since 2001, or (2) that I am not co-founder of the project. But in both cases, people scanning the Misplaced Pages-L mailing list archives found old mails in which you contradicted yourself. One embarrassing mail has you giving me credit--as, of course, I always had been given credit--for the idea of Misplaced Pages, and another embarrassing mail surfaced just a few days ago in which you called yourself "co-founder" of Misplaced Pages.

I find your behavior since 2004 transparently self-serving, considering that this rewriting of history began in 2004, just as Wikia.com was getting started, and you started promoting your reputation as the brains behind Misplaced Pages. There is a long "paper trail" establishing virtually all of my claims about Misplaced Pages, and which refute your various attempts to rewrite history.

I have not publicly confronted you about this before, to this extent. Public controversies are emotionally wrenching and time-consuming. I know I might be (verbally) attacked more viciously than ever by your fans and Misplaced Pages's. (To them, I just point out that Misplaced Pages is bigger than Jimmy Wales.) I have mainly limited myself to answering reporters' questions--keeping my more harshly-worded statements off the record--and to this page on my personal site. Occasionally I couldn't help objecting to some particularly outrageous claim, but I never went all out.

I thought that the evidence against your claims about me would shame you into changing your behavior. But, five years since you started misrepresenting my role in the founding of Misplaced Pages, you're still at it.

I have been content to watch you reap the rewards of the project I started for you, largely without comment. You (with Tim Shell and Michael Davis, the Bomis partners) did, after all, sponsor the project. After leaving Misplaced Pages, I went back to academia and, after that, worked for a succession of nonprofit projects--these days, Citizendium.org and now also WatchKnow.org. I have not tried to cash in on my own reputation. I have been approached by a number of venture capitalists, entrepreneurs, and publishers and have always told them that I have my own plans. If I had wanted to cash in myself, I wouldn't have moved away from Silicon Valley back to Ohio, as I did, in order to lower my costs in supporting the non-profit projects which I've made my life's work.

The Hot Press interview is the straw that broke this camel's back. I resent being the victim of another person's self-serving lies. Besides, I don't want to set a poor example in my failure to defend myself.

Please don't say I'm making mountains out of molehills. When you go out of your way to edit Misplaced Pages articles to remove the fact that I am a co-founder, or ask others to do so, I don't call that correcting "very simple errors," as you told Hot Press. What angers me is not any one error, but the accumulated weight of your lies about me--I've mentioned only a few of them here.

Finally, you might protest that you have said, several times, that I am not credited enough. For example, you told Hot Press:

I feel that Larry's work is often under-appreciated. He really did a lot in the first year to think through editorial policy. ... I would actually love to have it on the record that I said: I think Larry's work should be more appreciated. He's a really brilliant guy.

This sounds like a fine sentiment. But how could it be sincere? What better way to ensure that I am "under-appreciated" than to contradict your own first three press releases and tell the Boston Globe, just two years later, that it's "preposterous" that I am called co-founder?

I have two further requests, not of you, but of those who deal with you: the Wikimedia Foundation and reporters.

First, I ask the Board of the Wikimedia Foundation to reiterate the Foundation's original position (as expressed in its first press release) that we are both, in fact, founders of Misplaced Pages. (I note that the author of the recent history of Misplaced Pages, Andrew "fuzheado" Lih, was among the authors and contacts for this press release.) If the Foundation is unwilling, I request an explanation why its corporate view has changed. Is it simply because Jimmy Wales has made his wishes known and you enforce them?

Second, I request any reporter who interviews you about the early history of Misplaced Pages and Nupedia to interview me as well, so I can correct anything misleading. They should know that there are many details in my 2005 memoir of Nupedia and Misplaced Pages, and my story has never varied. I would also appreciate it if a reporter were to inquire about my request, above, to the Board of the Wikimedia Foundation.

--Larry Sanger (talk) 15:38, 8 April 2009 (UTC) (sanger@citizendium.org)

User talk:Jimbo Wales: Difference between revisions Add topic