If the problems William M. Connoley presents were temporary, I would
not have objected to Administrator status for him. He believes a
Wikipedia article should prominently feature the "truth." While this
sounds ok on its face, in practice any method of arriving at the
truth though reference to expert editors such as himself presents
prospects of sustained conflict. Our references need to be to
reputable published information.
Fred
On Jul 15, 2005, at 3:21 PM, Dan Grey wrote:
Y'know, one thing leaps out at me - how can 70/30
for/against possibly
be a 'no'? Turn it on it's head for a moment - 30/70 for/against, yet
it (whatever it is) is passed - that would madness, right? But that's
what we're saying here.
Someone will renominate him in a month or two and
he'll be a shoo-in.
No doubt.
Dan
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l