Um, acutally "anyone can edit" i.e. any user can create a new article, is exactly the reverse side to the right to nominate for deletion. and that's exactly what it means. nomination for AFD isn't a crazy unilateral power overload to new users. when new users nominate for deletion for obviously stupid reasons, it is speedily knocked down (like the last AFD for Conservapedia). Taking away the right to remove articles is just one step down the slippery slope of removing the right to create articles...and then edit articles at all (without meeting some absurd bureaucratic meritocracy or arbitrary time limit).
On 6/20/07, Tony Sidaway tonysidaway@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/21/07, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/21/07, Tony Sidaway tonysidaway@gmail.com wrote:
Absolutely. We seek to minimise the potential harm where that is possible without compromising the encyclopedia.
As soon as you bring in things not directly related to writing the encyclopedia in (and do no harm isn't at least outside the article on wicca) you compromise the encyclopedia.
I think this is true only if you think that information is neutral, irrespective of the form of presentation. Why would I not want to put my son's excellent academic record, or my beautiful and talented daughter's photograph, on a notice on every telegraph pole in my neighborhood? I've nothing to be ashamed of, I'm a proud father, and they're both adults, so why don't I just go ahead and do that?
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l