On 5/31/07, The Mangoe the.mangoe@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/30/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
The policy was marked "REJECTED", but someone made it a redirect to NPA, happening to obscure this detail. The redirect should probably be reverted to the failed proposal.
It was tried, and the result was of course an edit war, even when the rejected tag pointed at WP:NPA.
Considering that there's been so much discussion about BADSITES, to avoid marking it historical/rejected and simply redirecting it to an altogether different policy/guideline is ridiculous...sort of like redirecting the Esperanza page to the community portal. The specific concept of BADSITES is completely different from the specific concept of what NPA says about attack sites.
Johnleemk