On 8/13/07, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/13/07, FT2 ft2.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
It depends on the circumstances (there have been times when I've
certainly
very knowingly engaged in BRD, and
was well aware that the R was going to happen as part of the road to
D).
I still can't work out what B, R and D are. Enlighten me please? :)
Bold - Revert - Discuss. It's an editing model that acknowledges that the flipside of Be Bold! and Ignore all rules! is that people are free to remove whatever you do, and that in disagreements, you need to talk it out. It works well when you get to D (which admittedly is sometimes an ugly process).
But to sympathize with the main point, blanket "I don't like this" reverts
of good faith plausible edits, are usually far less helpful than
discussion,
or revert + discussion.
Though to play devil's advocate, I had a long ongoing problem with one editor who basically took it upon himself to rewrite entire articles, paragraph by paragraph, over weeks and months. He was convinced there was a sneaky, subtle POV there that had to be exorcised. The trouble was, his edits (and his writing style in general) were very difficult to understand and often had grammar problems. It was so tempting to revert them sometimes, but I usually ended up having to copy edit them all instead - a process he was fine with. He was more than happy to argue and explain his reasoning ad infinitum but it just never made much sense. And it was just so much work to actually try and understand the ridiculously subtle points he was making, and also to re-copyedit these paragraphs he was systematically ripping up and rearranging. Grr.
Steve
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l