On 7/28/06, Erik Moeller <eloquence(a)gmail.com> wrote:
It wasn't sustainable, of course, but I think it
reflects a very
different wiki philosophy than the notion that an article has be
perfectly balanced at any given point in time. I think the basic
philosophy is valid, [[iff]] the reader is informed about a lack of
balance through the appropriate tags. Of course, the description above
suggests adding unsourced innuendo, which we have rightly become much
more wary of in recent times.
Yeah, it's startling to read, the days when Wikipedia's main goal was
expanding itself. Now our goal seems to be keeping the freaks in
check.
Steve