Actually, I should revise - practically everyone, including Arbs and a
couple of Board members, feel that this change should be made to policy. I
must be missing something I guess.
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Nathan <nawrich(a)gmail.com> wrote:
It gets better - there is a proposal on WT:BLP to
change the normal
operation of a consensus discussion so that, for BLP articles, its
backwards. If this proposal makes its way into policy, the outcome will be
this: if an editor nominates a BLP article for deletion, and no consensus
for deletion is achieved, it will be deleted. I personally can't see how
that makes sense, but apparently a few of the folks on WT:BLP can. Maybe we
need a new process - Articles for Keep, where all nominated articles are
deleted unless enough people come by to make argue for keeping them.
Nathan
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 9:59 AM, Nathan <nawrich(a)gmail.com> wrote:
If you mean the veracity of the threat (as
opposed to whether he will
actually follow through)... There is a link to a blog, written by him, and
hosted by his law firm. That at least means he's put his name behind it more
or less in public.
Nathan
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 9:53 AM, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
So far it's a talk page message from a username that's made one edit,
on an IP that's made one edit (yes, I looked in checkuser when
forwarding it to Mike Godwin). That is NOT sufficient reason to play
Chicken Little unless and until we have something resembling
information.
- d.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l