Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:
Pete/Pcb21 wrote:
Are we really saying that if you want to get something done you have to break the rules and accept a temporary punishment in "sacrifice"?
No, that's not right. What Anthony did was wrong and foolish, and the result was appropriate.
If Anthony had a problem with how slow the process was going, or a problem with the process itself, or a problem with the process being complete but not implement, then the solution would have been quite simple: come to the mailing list and post a constructive comment about the situation, asking for support.
Behaving like a jerk to force an issue is really not helpful.
Getting into edit wars to get your way is just poor form.
--Jimbo
Yes I absolutely agree that Anthony behaved very badly and he's back to square one (or even square minus one) in gaining people's trust.
However I am really complaining that his actions, by and large, have succeeded. If he hadn't have behaved like that then [[Wikipedia:Tomorrow's featured article]] wouldn't exist right now.
I am at a bit of a loss of how to improve things though: before the fact - we should've taken more notice of the talk page. However this is a very vague and unimplementable guideline.
after the fact - doing nothing to change the policy in a sort of "we don't negotiate with vandals" style seems to be cutting off our nose to spite our face.
All in all, a tricky one. I thought the general issue was worth flagging as it may happen again - on our very busiest Wikipedia: pages it is hard to change things because there are so many interested parties.
Pete/Pcb21