[WikiEN-l] Indefinite block and desysopping by User:Danny

[Ray Saintonge]

Delirium wrote:

>Kelly Martin wrote:
>  
>
>>On 4/20/06, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>But Danny has explicitly said (on this list) that he is also a normal
>>>editor, and only his actions that are accompanied with a statement that
>>>they are WP:OFFICE actions should be treated as such.  So if he does
>>>something and does not tag it WP:OFFICE, we should all operate on the
>>>presumption that he is doing it in his capacity as a normal Wikipedian.
>>>      
>>>
>>That does not excuse reversion without discussion.  Even taking as an
>>assumption that Danny had been acting on his own behalf, Erik's
>>actions could easily have been the start of a wheel war, and were
>>inappropriate by any reasonable standard.  WP:OFFICE has nothing to do
>>with that; wheel warring is still wheel warring.
>>    
>>
>He didn't revert Danny's edits or wheel war.  Danny stubbed and 
>protected the page; Erik noted that he was willing to give Danny the 
>benefit of the doubt on stubbing, but that the protection was contrary 
>to the protection policy (a correct observation), so unprotected the 
>page but left it stubbed.  It is quite acceptable and even encouraged to 
>unprotect pages that have been inappropriately protected.
>
If the original protection was not clearly explained one cannot really 
blame Erik for the steps that he took in making a single reversion.  
Going further than that should have required more discussion than a 
simple edit summary.  Kelly justifies her stand with the words "could 
easily have been".  It is improper to conclude that what could be is 
what is.  Yes, wheel warring is still wheel warring, but what could be a 
wheel war is not a wheel war; it's speculation.  Assume good faith ... 
even from Erik. ;-)

Ec