Wikipedia talk:Missing Wikipedians

I like this page and the thought behind it. OK so they a sort of obituaries but is good to acknowledge former contributors. ping 06:37, 13 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I moved these 2 off the page. Interesting stories but they have not left and are not missing. I also moved April as she may not have completely left - last contributed a week ago. Angela 22:33, Oct 28, 2003 (UTC)

User:Stevertigo (returned) "I left for a while this summer after the whole 'smear SV as an anti-Semite campaign' got out of hand--No hard feelings now, the original culprits--me and the the other party (it takes two to tango) have both curbed our use of provocation to effect a change in POV. I also learned that when people (those who cant win an argument with reason, facts, wit...) resort to sticking labels on you, Kung Fu will not work. A little patience and maybe some Tai Chi do work--but trying to fight the irrationality with rationality (or try explaining the unexlainable) will never be easy. I simply left for a while and came back--a lot less edits, but in fact a lot of us go overboard with when we get into something new. I only edit reasonable amounts now--no burnout."-SV

The Cunctator: Returned but with sharply curtailed editing, and will soon cease all together, due to treatment by LMS and the institution of what The Cunctator perceives as autocratic policies on Wikipedia. Or not... he hasn't left yet.

This is one of the sickest pages I've come across here at Wikipedia. Not just to the uninitiated it reads as if the bullies clap each other on the back each time a frustrated contributor has left the community. I'm appalled by the speculations they then seem to indulge in. Below see part of Renata's reply (of August 8, 2003) to my e-mail and then compare what it says about her on this page:

Hello Kurt,

it's nice to be missed ;-) [...] I also found it difficult to be in the firing line a few times. Most people let one get on with one's work, but there are always some who make life more difficult than it needs to be. In the end I was dreading even just logging on! [...]

KF 17:10, 29 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I think you're missing the point of the page KF. It is a way to recognise or announce that people have left. Otherwise there's no record. They just disappear. It is most certainly not a celebration of the fact they have left. Quite the opposite. If you have different information on Renata, why on earth not just edit the page and let G-Man know his mistake? Angela

"This is a list of missing Wikipedians who were once an integral part of our community, and who have died, been incapacitated, been incarcerated, or decided to leave forever, join a cult, have tired of vandalism and/or policy, found a job, or have some otherwise lame or legitimate excuse for leaving."

If that introductory paragraph is not making fun of people who have left, what is? I've read several of the user pages, among them Stormwriter's, who says that "never have I encountered such a consistently rude, offensive collection of individuals. Not on UseNet, not on AOL, not in 'real life'.

"Impassioned debate due to intellectual disagreement is one thing; it's the only way humans progress. Ad hominem name-calling is another. Attempts to moderate the debates only results in the name-callers shifting their attention to those attempting to moderate. [...]

"This project had a wonderful potential. Now it's drowning in a sea of recriminations, ridiculous rules, and smug self-satisfaction among the self-appointed elite. I cannot accept this situation. Enjoy your toy, folks, until it crumbles under you. In the future, I suspect that hardly anyone, with the exception of those who enjoy fighting just for the hell of it, will stay long enough anymore to make more than a few contributions. Let's leave it to them. Sayonara."

I don't know any of Stormwriter's contributions, but whatever his fields of interest may be: What he writes pretty well sums up why people leave or -- something not recognized or registered here -- why many decide to restrict themselves to a few minor edits rather than carry on like before. Ridiculing them by claiming they have joined a cult or found a job or whatever is not going to help stop the brain drain.

Also, why this obsession with record-keeping? Can't we leave people alone, not even after they have left? However, if you really wanted to appreciate the work they did for Wikipedia before their departure, why not list some representative contributions of theirs and, unknown to the community at large, send them an e-mail, ask them why they have left and try to persuade them to come back?

P S I don't know G-Man, and as it takes an average of 90 seconds per try and at least two attempts to get to the page history I really didn't bother to find out who wrote what.

KF 21:24, 29 Oct 2003 (UTC)

So rewrite the intro. I can't understand why you are accusing me of having an obsession with record keeping and I don't see how this is in any way harrasing anyone who has left. Why don't you list their contributions instead of complaining about the page? And I have e-mailed people that have left so please stop making false assumptions and accusations. Angela 21:51, Oct 29, 2003 (UTC)

I am one of those who left. The page is fine. Leave Angela alone.Ark30inf 22:01, 29 Oct 2003 (UTC)