rootology?
On 12/21/06, George Herbert <george.herbert(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/21/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)wikia.com> wrote:
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
It's the hidden from non-admins part that is
a problem.
If you did any significant editing, the discussions on your talk page
could
> be of interest to other editors even after you leave. It could be
tagged
as
> belonging to a left user, it can be protected from trolls, and it
might
even
be blankable, but it cannot be deleted.
In general, I do not agree with this approach. Allowing people to
vanish, including deleting their user and user_talk pages, is often the
best way to part company with dignity. "Could be of interest" should
not be the standard, I think, but rather "Is indispensable to the
functioning of the encyclopedia."
There can be exceptions, of course. If a user repeatedly joins and
deletes (perhaps sockpuppeting), causing a lot of disruptive demands to
delete their userpage, we could just ignore it if that seemed like the
best way to deal with it.
But in general, I see no reason to have a general policy of keeping talk
pages around that make someone who would like to leave us unhappy.
The specific claim here is that this was a rootology sockpuppet, rootology
having been banned in the ED arbcom case.
The evidence is being closely held, but I trust the admins in question.
I find this all sort of unfortunate, because before that case rootology
seemed like he might be contributing positively, but he left in rather a
huff and under a cloud.
--
-george william herbert
george.herbert(a)gmail.com
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l