On 2/27/06, Matt Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/27/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
What I'm interested in is the behavior that the new policy permits and encourages--namely, aggressive deletion of other people's contributions, which can be backed up by The Official Policy.
Agreed. This is policy wording driven through on the basis of controversial, edit-warred articles.
Actually, it was The Cunctator who was trying to introduce a major change to [[WP:V]]. The page says: "The obligation to provide a reputable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it."
He tried to change it to:
""If an editor adds something controversial, the obligation to provide a reputable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material . . ."
That would be a major policy change.
WP:V is supported by WP:NOR, a longstanding, established policy. The only way to show you're not doing OR is to produce a reliable source. If you can't produce one, your edit may be removed, because OR is never allowed.
If we ever get into a situation where lots of editors are using NOR and V as an excuse to run around removing unsourced edits, where the material has been published elsewhere and isn't controversial, but those wanting to retain it are mysteriously unable to cite a source, then we can revisit the issue. But currently, that isn't happening (and how could it?) so it looks as though you're trying to create a problem where none exists.
Sarah