On 5/22/06, Tony Sidaway f.crdfa@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/21/06, SCZenz sczenz@gmail.com wrote:
We are losing worthwhile articles because people don't take 30 seconds
to
read them and evaluate the claims they make. Isn't that bad?
There are by my estimate between 2 and 10 bad speedy calls per day. I think this acceptable collateral damage--if I hadn't checked thousands of speedies myself I'd call it unbelievably good--but obviously it would be nice if there were no bad calls. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
An Jimbo has said as well:
"Personally I would modify this slightly by even further acknowledging that it's _ok_ for people doing newpages patrol (especially) to err in the defense of quality, and that resurrecting a few things here and there behind them is a small price to pay for avoiding another Seigenthaler incident. "
Admin actions are reversable anyway