Actually, I should revise - practically everyone, including Arbs and a couple of Board members, feel that this change should be made to policy. I must be missing something I guess.
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
It gets better - there is a proposal on WT:BLP to change the normal operation of a consensus discussion so that, for BLP articles, its backwards. If this proposal makes its way into policy, the outcome will be this: if an editor nominates a BLP article for deletion, and no consensus for deletion is achieved, it will be deleted. I personally can't see how that makes sense, but apparently a few of the folks on WT:BLP can. Maybe we need a new process - Articles for Keep, where all nominated articles are deleted unless enough people come by to make argue for keeping them.
Nathan
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 9:59 AM, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
If you mean the veracity of the threat (as opposed to whether he will actually follow through)... There is a link to a blog, written by him, and hosted by his law firm. That at least means he's put his name behind it more or less in public.
Nathan
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 9:53 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
So far it's a talk page message from a username that's made one edit, on an IP that's made one edit (yes, I looked in checkuser when forwarding it to Mike Godwin). That is NOT sufficient reason to play Chicken Little unless and until we have something resembling information.
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l