[WikiEN-l] Don't remove a WP:OFFICE tag put there by Danny

[Michael Snow]

Delirium wrote:

> Michael Snow wrote:
>
>>> Isn't a directive from the front office saying "nobody can edit this 
>>> page" a top-down directive?  How else would you describe it?
>>
>> Why does it need to be described in the first place? For rhetorical 
>> purposes, as is clear by the choice of description you're applying.
>
> How can we talk about things on a mailing list of we aren't allowed to 
> use words and phrases?

Nobody's denying you the ability to use words and phrases. I'm pointing 
out that these words and phrases are being used as rhetoric, and that 
insisting other people should agree to and adopt your rhetoric is 
counterproductive.

>   I'm interested in discussing the class of cases where the front 
> office gives a directive relating to an article, e.g. "do not 
> unprotect this article"; or "rewrite this article from scratch with no 
> pedophiles as authors"; or some other such directive.  A shorthand way 
> of referring to such cases, which captures the essence of the matter 
> being disputed, is "top-down directive".
>
> If you really prefer, I could say something like, "non-optional 
> suggestions resulting from Wikimedia Foundation activity", but that 
> seems a bit silly.  Do you have a better term you'd prefer?

To my reading, "directive from the Wikimedia Foundation" seems to 
capture the entirety of that phrase. Again, calling it "top-down" is 
pure rhetoric.

--Michael Snow