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(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/21/07, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/21/07, Tony Sidaway
<tonysidaway(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l