User talk:Larry Sanger

Archive

Tucker Carlson interview

Just watching your interview with Tucker Carlson, and it's really good! Stadt67 (talk) 21:39, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Larry Sanger (talk) 21:08, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	I think this looks really cool. Lots of solid ideas here and I hope that WP:THESIS9 is looked at in a way which might then bring about some of the others. Seems to me that would be where we start. Iljhgtn (talk) 13:20, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Larry Sanger (talk) 20:41, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Fantastic work, particularly regarding sources and bias. With Wikipedia's reputation already faltering, I hope the broader community takes these proposals seriously. Dan.Toler (talk) 14:55, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Larry Sanger

Welcome back @Larry Sanger ! :) Vitorperrut555 (talk) 01:46, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar for Efforts to Get Wikipedia Back on Track

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		Saw your plan in The Free Press article. Thank you for your efforts to put Wikipedia back on track after its derailment. Quaerens-veritatem (talk) 02:37, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

I'm new on editing and using Wiki 'actively', but I want to endorse my deepest respect for your proposals :3

Murielps (talk) 08:09, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to everyone above!

I appreciate the warm "welcome back." Larry Sanger (talk) 21:09, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sanger Young Reader Program

Awhile ago I'd recommended that you, Jimbo, and WMF could "heal" a bit if WMF set up a program to both teach and institutionalize teaching very young children to read, which seems an interest of yours. Since I've not mentioned it here thought this might be a good time. Would you be open to having such a program named for you or becoming active in it if it evolves? The concept is that Wikipedia is meant to be read, and that teaching very young children to read (flashcards, putting in the hours, etc.) provides a foundation for lifelong learning, mental adventure, and possible real-life accomplishments, such a program would be a good fit for the foundation to both fund and sustain. Thanks. Just an idea for now. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:48, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know that I've already written one of the more prominent of such programs? See https://readingbear.org/ This digitizes the method I used with my boys when they were toddlers. The method works well, and I would like it to be open sourced. I would be interested in such a WMF program, if it had any chance of being of reasonably good quality. Larry Sanger (talk) 19:58, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Took a quick dive into Reading Bear (needs a Wikipedia page), interesting approach and will get back to it. By "program" I meant WMF funding and helping develop an entire structure of methods, uses, and real-world teaching on a large scale, as well as convincing parents that early reading gives a child much needed and important brain and mental-image development. This would be appropriate for a foundation devoted to, breaking it down to its initial component, reading. I think your essay helped in what I've seen as a necessary healing process, with some editors using its presentation to go after the editor and not the topic (venting anger), and, to go full circle, at least one more friendly societal-changing collabs between you, Jimbo Wales, and WMF may be needed - this young readers initiative being an attempt to fill that while benefiting overall humanity and individual children. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:43, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia:THESIS1" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Wikipedia:THESIS1 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 2 § Wikipedia:THESIS1 until a consensus is reached. JMWt (talk) 12:23, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses

User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Sophisticatedevening^(talk) 15:20, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That didn't work out very well, did it, Sophisticatedevening? Larry Sanger (talk) 03:42, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. — Newslinger talk 17:18, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the following topic areas have also been designated as contentious topics:

• the Arab–Israeli conflict (WP:CT/A-I)
• articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles (WP:CT/BLP)
• complementary and alternative medicine (WP:CT/CAM)
• climate change (WP:CT/CC)
• COVID-19, broadly construed (WP:CT/COVID)
• pseudoscience and fringe science (WP:CT/CF)
• gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them (WP:CT/GG)
• the region of South Asia (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), broadly construed, including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups (WP:CT/SA)

Thank you. — Newslinger talk 17:18, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Which pages do you mean? You don't say. --Larry Sanger (talk) 19:36, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Larry Sanger, any edit that overlaps with a contentious topic on any Wikipedia page is covered under these procedures. Per Wikipedia:Contentious topics, "this contentious topics procedure applies to all pages broadly related to a topic, as well as parts of other pages that are related to the topic". The above template is a standard message sent to editors to ensure that they are aware of these procedures. — Newslinger talk 20:40, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You haven't answered my question. What is the relevance of your remarks to my work here? Also, should I take myself to be warned by you? Are you an administrator? Should I feel threatened and rebuked? Larry Sanger (talk) 03:38, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit at Special:Permalink/1314044675 added content that overlaps with the contentious topics listed in this discussion. While I am an administrator, this is not pertinent to contentious topic alerts, as any editor may post a contentious topic alert pursuant to the conditions in Wikipedia:Contentious topics § Awareness of contentious topics. Contentious topic alerts are not warnings, but informational messages; they are not intended to make you "feel threatened and rebuked". If you would like to opt out of receiving contentious topic alerts for other topic areas, you may apply the {{Contentious topics/aware}} template on your user talk page and specify the topic areas that you do not wish to receive alerts for, but please keep in mind that the template does not yet support community-authorized sanctions. — Newslinger talk 06:03, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason why you didn't simply say User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses? What is the purpose and use of being so indirect and bureaucratic? Do you see why this might come across as threatening and rebuking to someone without his wits about him? Larry Sanger (talk) 16:00, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I use diffs when discussing specific edits because diffs are immutable. Special:Permalink/1314044675 was the very first edit to User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses, so I used a permanent link because Special:Diff/1314044675 does not show any content when viewed from the mobile website. Contentious topic alerts have been implemented since 2014 (when it was known as discretionary sanctions alerts), and retained when discretionary sanctions became contentious topics in 2022. Editors who participate in contentious topics receive contentious topic alerts on a regular basis, and very few of these editors complain, as "This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing" makes it clear that the alert is an informational message. If you feel that the alert is "threatening and rebuking" and have a constructive suggestion to improve it, then feel free to present your suggestion on a village pump page. — Newslinger talk 17:10, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Newslinger: I'm also confused. Do you consider some of the theses to be US politics related? This is a stretch IMO. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:45, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bri: Content such as "In American politics, articles must not favor either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party, or be written as if there were no third parties (such as the Libertarian Party, Green Party, or a new 'America Party')" in Special:Permalink/1314044675 is indeed related to American politics and covered by WP:CT/AP. — Newslinger talk 18:10, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, I find this policy to be puerile and insidious, and part of the policy creep that implementing Thesis 9 would reverse. Larry Sanger (talk) 15:59, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to make your case on a village pump page. There is already a discussion about User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) § User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses. — Newslinger talk 17:10, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per your demand on X that "Wikipedia" respond to your Martin Luther cosplay lest you run to Congress for legislation

Here's what I agree with:

• End IP editing.
• End blacklists of sources.
• Establish a simple reader feedback mechanism, although not necessarily a vapid thumbs up/thumbs down that you no doubt envision. The bit about an "open source AI rating system" is unintelligible.
• Embrace inclusionism.

Here's what I disagree with:

• Pretty much everything else.

I find it ironic that a person who has spent so much time banning perceived ideological enemies off of your Elon social network account is now putting themselves forward as the great adherent of intellectual pluralism. I also find the list of Wikipedians you "sure wouldn't want anyone to dox, nudge nudge wink wink" to be intentionally threatening and vicious and par for the course.

Very truly yours, Tim Davenport, Corvallis, OR, responding for "Wikipedia" //// Carrite (talk) 17:55, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tim, I confess I'm a little surprised when you say you can support some of these proposals. I'm sincerely glad you have taken the time to say so.

I would say that you might want to read this short section about an open source AI rating system, which you might have skipped. I spent a month last December-January programming something very much like such a system, so I know it's not only intelligible, it's a good idea and quite feasible.

There is nothing remotely ironic about personally blocking the participants in digital struggle session. These are the enemies of pluralism, of course. Pluralism involves a desire to see many different views fairly represented, so that people are free to make up their own minds for themselves.

As to your accusation about doxxing, I find that to be an obvious violation of WP:AGF. I added that because I knew that people would accuse me of suggesting that the Power 62 be doxxed. I am quite sincerely saying I do not want them to be doxxed, and I will thank you to not make the mistake again.

But again, thanks for taking the time to express (very partial) support for some of the proposals. Larry Sanger (talk) 19:47, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Larry. Thanks for responding. There are absolutely some things on your list that are reasonable. Please use ordinary WP processes to further change in that direction. I'd particularly like to see IP editing get the boot ("register to edit" instead) and to eliminate the entire notion of "inherently unreliable sources."

Feel free to file a complaint at either AN/I or AN against me for my "obvious violation" of AGF. I contend that as a leading internet spokesman for Team Trump and given their decade-long tradition of death threats and IRL harassment of their "enemies within" (quoting the cult leader), you knew exactly what you were doing when you constructed your "please please please do not dox these anonymous wikipedians!!!!" list. —Tim ///Carrite (talk) 19:59, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tim, as co-founder, I have taken it upon myself to push Wikipedia in a direction where there are saner processes for change. If you will look at, for example, theses 1 and 9, you might notice that a central part of this project is to bring Wikipedia to its senses about just how dysfunctional it has been precisely in its "ordinary WP processes." I am mounting considered criticisms of the very "ordinary WP processes" that you are recommending I follow. You know and I know that there is very little chance of anything changing according to "ordinary WP processes": that is the point of the "problem" section of essay 9. Sometimes radical reform requires changes of process, such as an legislative assembly.

Also, I would appreciate it if you not insult me further by patronizingly instructing me about how to report you. Suffice to say I can figure it out if I want to go that route, and don't need your advice. As to your accusation about doxxing, that is speculation about my motives. This is not permitted. And calling me "a leading internet spokesman for Team Trump" accords me much much greater influence than I have, believe me. In any event, the fact that you think this is somehow relevant to thesis 6 is very telling indeed. It's almost as if you're saying that the Power 62 is, perhaps, uniformly aligned with the other side? Is that what you're assuming? Larry Sanger (talk) 03:37, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ahem, you're the one singing the praises of Ted Cruz and making threats to run to the Trumpist Congress for "carve outs" of the law expressly to punish WMF if your Too Long; Didn't Read essay isn't adopted. Please don't pretend that your sudden presence here after two decades in devoid of political intent.

Now, that said, if you're actually serious about reforming Wikipedia instead of engaging in a political performance for your pals like Tucker Carlson, I would suggest you focus upon the fundamental problem — the banning of sources outright by a clique of political gameplayers, rather than WP following the valid historical process of considering the veracity of edits on a case-by-case basis. THAT'S the big issue, is it not? Pick your battle, make your case, and see if the great inert object can be moved.

I personally would like to see IP editing go down the drain first; and there is actually arguably a better chance of getting that through, now that WMF is starting to understand that IPs help bad state actors track down and repress Wikipedians. They've been trying (with little success) to come up with a way of "anonymizing" IP addresses. The obvious solution, which bucks two decades of tradition, is to get rid of IP editing all together. No IPs in the edit history — problem solved.

I think the question of anonymity is a battle that can't be won. Given the terrorist tendencies of the ultra-nationalist American right, that's not even a battle that should be fought in the current political climate.

Like I say, if you're serious about reforming WP, focus and organize. You might be surprised to find allies in unexpected places if your motives are clean. But forgive me for doubting very much that's what's driving this particular effort. Carrite (talk) 08:15, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I can't read or respond to that, Tim, until you have edited it so that it is in line with WP:AGF and WP:NPA. Larry Sanger (talk) 16:03, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses

User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ahri Boy (talk) 22:24, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as you can see, the page was speedily kept, Ahri Boy. Larry Sanger (talk) 03:41, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Portraits of you

Dr. Sanger, all free pictures of you are about 20 or more years old. I was wondering if you would be interested in uploading a more recent self portrait under a free license? 3df (talk) 08:42, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking. Eventually I'll get around to this. I'd be happy to work with a professional photographer. Larry Sanger (talk) 15:56, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My favorite pic in the Larry Sanger Commons category is File:Kate Upton and Harley Upton.jpg. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:39, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes yes, I'm very sure Kate Upton has a pic of me on her wall! Don't tell my wife! LOL Larry Sanger (talk) 16:55, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Thank you. AhmedDjoudi (talk) 09:49, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	I'm a little later here, but thank you for having the courage to put out your 9 theses. I hope the wikipedia community actually sincerely tries to help resolve the issues you have raised in your essay even if they don't use your specific solutions. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 00:25, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully,

I disagree. Guylaen (talk) 06:57, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to say

Firstly, welcome back. I'm glad someone finally brought up number eight, indefinite blocking was once a reality for me. I was one of few who stayed around, and indef blocking can scare off editors who can be very good if and when they came back. I also think WMF needs a more clear legislation. Our volunteers are very good, but we need people who can run the project as a job. I can't say anything positive about six. Crats and CUs don't deserve to be harassed off-site because they did something one user did not like. And what would they be held accountable for? Running a check on someone with a lot of evidence of socking? If Wikipedia were to implement this (which I myself very much oppose), I think it should be limited to the Arb Com. I hope you see this, and welcome back again. CREditzWiki (Talk to me!!) 14:00, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion, please

Can you comment here? This list is meant to encourage editors to take the perhaps somewhat scary step of nominating an article to be a featured article. Many of the articles missing attributed nominators are from the brilliant prose days, and were nominated/added to that page by you at a time when there was not much of a review process. The bot that maintains the list notices FAs and FFAs that are missing nomination history. If I add you as the nominator for these articles you will suddenly have quite a few stars on this list (mostly FFAs at this point). I would very much appreciate hearing your opinion about this. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:20, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Not sure what more to say there. Interesting from a historical standpoint perhaps, but I doubt it matters much. Larry Sanger (talk) 16:54, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of discussion involving Thesis 8

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) regarding revisiting indefinite blocking, which is related to your eighth thesis. The section is titled "Removing all active indefinite blocks older than 20 years." I am leaving a message here in case you didn't get the notification from my mention. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 15:38, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Larry Sanger (talk) 16:47, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

give me your opinion on my idea

I've been thinking about the ultimate knowledge-based OSS platform for a long time, and I've come up with a concept that's both reproducible and universal. I'd like to discuss it with you to make it a reality. How can I contact you? I prefer emailIm siryang (talk) 11:29, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]