On 10/15/06, Steve Summit <scs(a)eskimo.com> wrote:
geni wrote:
On 10/15/06, Steve Summit <scs(a)eskimo.com>
wrote:
So (as ever) some care is needed here; anyone who
got the idea
that "any fact left uncited for 7 days may/must be removed"
would be setting themselves or the encyclopedia up for a fall.
We don't have the manpower.
But that's not even the point. If the notion got entrenched that
*any* fact-tagged statement left unattended for more than a week
could be summarily deleted, I do dare to speculate that it would
lead to abuses, completely apart from the question of whether
every fact-tagged statement would receive proper attention.
I don't really see why it would lead to any more abuse than the notion
that *any* {{no-source}} tagged image left unattended for more than a
week could be summarily deleted.
Well, I guess deleting images requires an admin to agree, so maybe
that's a reason. But on the other hand, a "deleted" fact can easily
be re-added by anyone.
Frankly, I think what's *more* likely to lead to abuses is the notion
that a fact which is completely unsourced can be left *in* the
encyclopedia for more than a week. And it *has* led to abuses, lots
of them.
Anthony