BLP? BLB? BAR?
I have to admit, Citizendium does have a point.
The acronymization of Wikipedia has gotten totally out of control.
Or should I say, the AOW has gotten TOC.
On 3/25/07, Ron Ritzman ritzman@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/25/07, Fred Bauder fredbaud@waterwiki.info wrote:
No, that's why we have BLP. Malicious material may be reverted and
deleted without limit > by any user.
And if it's deleted for that reason and no other admin restores it then fine.
Quoting BLB 3
"Administrators encountering biographies that are unsourced and controversial in tone, where there is no NPOV version to revert to, should delete the article without discussion"
I'm assuming that admins are reasonable people, otherwise they shouldn't be admins. Therefore, if admin Foo, speedy deletes a bio because he feels that there is no NPOV version to revert to and that deletion is reverted by admin BAR, then admin BAR reasonably believes that the bio can be made NPOV.
At this point what would be better, to discuss the deletion "in process" or have wheel war with the article being deleted and restored over and over again?
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l